From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Sat Jan 1 09:11:58 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 09:11:58 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Temporary employment opportunity with FWS in Arcata Message-ID: Happy New Year everyone! The Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office is currently advertising for temporary fishery technicians at the GS-05, 06, and 07 levels. http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.aspx?JobID=95095221&JobTitle=Biological+Science+Technician+(Fish)+(TEMPORARY)&q=R8-11-414250-KJ&brd=3876&vw=b&FedEmp=N&FedPub=Y&pg=1&re=0&AVSDM=2010-12-27+00%3a03%3a00 If you know any excellent candidates interested in temporary work, please forward. I hope you all have a great 2011! Charlie Charlie Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Sun Jan 2 16:17:10 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2011 16:17:10 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury News 1 1 11 Message-ID: <001301cbaadb$91f9ad50$b5ed07f0$@net> Report: Former Santa Cruz legislator John Laird named to the top natural resources post by Jerry Brown By Lisa M. Krieger, Paul Rogers and Kurtis Alexander Bay Area News Group Posted: 01/01/2011 03:22:44 PM PST Updated: 01/01/2011 09:38:38 PM PST Gov.-elect Jerry Brown is expected to appoint former Santa Cruz legislator John Laird head of the state Natural Resources Agency, sources said Saturday -- a role that will give the environmental advocate a powerful voice in oversight of logging, fishing, farming, parks and water policies. The appointment, likely to be announced after Brown's swearing-in this week, suggests the governor-elect is hewing to his liberal principals, despite much talk about bipartisanship in the face of the state's budget disaster. If named to the secretary's post, Laird faces an agenda that includes some of California's most contentious issues. One of the most immediate will be the decline of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, a major link in the state's water supply; a state bond, designed to address the numerous pressures on the delta, is expected to go before voters in 2012. Other problems include underfunding of the state park system and a shortage of wildlife wardens. Brown adviser Steve Glazer would not confirm the news -- announced by the advocacy group Environment California and confirmed by several sources familiar with the selection -- saying that all cabinet appointments will be announced only after Brown takes office Monday. Laird, 60, declined to comment. His political life, which started on the Santa Cruz City Council three decades ago, has been marked by environmental advocacy. On the council, he led fights against offshore oil drilling and pushed for the designation of the Monterey Bay as a national marine sanctuary. As a Democratic assemblyman in a district stretching from Morgan Hill to Big Sur, he co-authored California's landmark climate bill, AB 32; promoted water conservation; expanded the development of renewable energy and sustainable building standards; protected oil spill response funding; and established the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, a state agency designed to protect the mountain region. He earned a score of 100 percent from the California League of Conservation Voters, which called him "hands-down one of the best legislators California has had this decade." Laird also is considered an expert on state finances, having led the Assembly's powerful Budget Committee. Only six months ago, he was denied a Central Coast Senate seat in a special election to replace Abel Maldonado; Laird lost the District 15 race to Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee, R-San Luis Obispo. Since then, Laird has been teaching at UC Santa Cruz. The position -- which pays about $175,000 a year -- requires confirmation from the state Senate, and San Jose State political science professor Larry Gerston predicted Laird will face resistance. "Laird is a well-known, outspoken environmentalist," Gerston said. "He knows his stuff." But, Gerston predicted, people who believe the state is moving too quickly on environmental issues "will not be happy with John Laird and will consider it an affront to business." Indeed, state Republican Party Chairman Ron Nehring blasted the move. "An appointment like John Laird, to me, is an indicator of how far to the left Jerry Brown is reaching to populate his administration," said Nehring, a former member of the state Board of Forestry. "John Laird is an extreme liberal, and he believes the only way to protect the environment is to make government as big and intrusive as possible." Environmentalists, meanwhile, celebrated. "It is a brilliant appointment," said Ann Notthoff, California Advocacy director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. "John Laird knows resource issues," she said. "And he really knows how the state budget works, with a lot of innovative ideas about how to stretch scarce state dollars -- which will be one of the biggest challenges this year." Contact Lisa M. Krieger at lkrieger at mercurynews.com. john laird Age: 60 Home: Santa Cruz Party: Democratic Career: Analyst, Santa Cruz County Administrative Office, 1974-1978, 1979-1991, 1995-2002; Santa Cruz City Council, 1981-1990; mayor, 1983-84 and 1987-88; executive director of Santa Cruz AIDS Project, 1991-1994; California Assemblyman, 2002-2008 Personal: One of the first openly gay mayors in the United States and one of the first two openly gay men to serve in the state Legislature. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Mon Jan 3 11:56:26 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 11:56:26 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Capitol Alert 1 3 11 Message-ID: <00e101cbab80$4fb66c30$ef234490$@net> Capitol Alert The latest on California politics and government January 3, 2011 Hoopa Valley tribe loses case of fish v. energy Northern California's Hoopa Valley Tribe has now lost a court battle that pit fish protection against energy production. In a quietly issued Dec. 28 ruling , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected the tribe's challenge to a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decision regarding a hydroelectric project on the Klamath River. The hydro project provides power to residents of six states, while the Hoopa Valley Tribe relies on the river for trout. After FERC refused to impose additional restrictions on the hydro project to protect the trout, the tribe sued. The three-judge panel, though, ruled that federal regulators were acting within their expertise. Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2011/01/hoopa-valley-tribe-loses- case.html#ixzz1A0J6M4P3 Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 44874 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Wed Jan 5 11:56:43 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 11:56:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Salmon Water Now Video Message-ID: <018201cbad12$af403b70$0dc0b250$@net> Happy New Year from Salmon Water Now! At the start of a new year, we thought we should make a new video: Westlands: Turn Off the Tap. YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhlTUmtHFkg &hd=1 Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Wed Jan 5 11:41:22 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 11:41:22 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Hatchery Totals 1 7 11 Message-ID: <017c01cbad10$8a9a4880$9fced980$@net> Folks, Attached is a spreadsheet with the latest totals for Trinity River Hatchery through Jan 7. Chinook and coho numbers are winding down and it will be pretty much a steelhead show from here on out. Wade Sinnen Associate Biologist Trinity River Project CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weirTRH_summary 1 7 11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 93184 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Jan 6 10:35:56 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 10:35:56 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Sacramento Bee 1 6 11 Message-ID: <001101cbadd0$ae3801e0$0aa805a0$@net> Coalition declares Sierra, Delta habitats threatened by climate change By Matt Weiser mweiser at sacbee.com Published: Thursday, Jan. 6, 2011 - 12:00 am | Page 3B Both the Sierra Nevada and the San Francisco Bay- Delta have been named by environmental groups to a new list of 10 American habitats threatened by climate change. The list was released Wednesday by the Endangered Species Coalition, a network of hundreds of conservation groups in the United States. The 10 threatened habitats - deemed most important for endangered species in a warming world - were selected by a panel of 10 scientists from across the country representing academia and the conservation community. They relied on existing data rather than new research. It is a first by the coalition, which previously generated annual lists focused on individual species rather than whole habitats. "Our hope is to bring some attention to what we feel are key places to offset some of the impacts that are going to come over the next several years," said Mark Rockwell, the coalition's California representative. Rockwell said the Delta, as included on the list, includes upstream river environments that flow toward the ocean. Thus, it encompasses a huge range of habitats and species, from Sacramento River salmon to upland areas that make the region America's largest winter range for raptors as well as vital habitat for amphibians and wildflowers. Much of this environment, Rockwell said, is threatened by reduced runoff and warmer water linked to climate change, as well as increasing human demand for water that may be a related consequence. The Sierra Nevada made the list, in part, because its diversity of habitats creates a home for many species found nowhere else, such as the mountain yellow-legged frog and Sierra bighorn sheep. A warmer climate threatens to further shrink habitats already diminished by population growth and changing land uses. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Jan 6 10:40:03 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 10:40:03 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Santa Cruz Sentinel 1 5 11 Message-ID: <001601cbadd1$374f8700$a5ee9500$@net> Laird receives appointment from Gov. Brown as Secretary for Natural Resources By Kurtis Alexander - Santa Cruz Sentinel Posted: 01/05/2011 12:46:02 PM PST Former Santa Cruz legislator John Laird on Wednesday was officially appointed by Gov. Jerry Brown California Secretary for Natural Resources, a post that oversees more than two dozen environmental agencies and commissions from state parks to water resources. Laird, 60, declined to discuss specific policy matters before convening with the new governor. But he says he looks forward to bringing his record of environmental activism as a three-term assemblyman and two-term Santa Cruz mayor to the position. "I'm incredibly honored to be selected and look forward to the hard work that comes with the job," said Laird, a Democrat. "I care about the future of parks and the future of water and the future of fish and game protection and marine protection, and they're all right here." The Natural Resources post will put Laird at the center of such hot-button issues as water shortages in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, funding for state parks, fire management and coastal protection. This position requires Senate confirmation. The pay is $175,000 annually. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri Jan 7 17:33:42 2011 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 17:33:42 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?iso-8859-1?q?CBB=3A_Salmon_Survival=3A_It=92s_All?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_About_The__Early_Days_In_The_Ocean_And_2010_Tough_To_Call?= Message-ID: <20110108013357.846C317794F7@mx.dcn.davis.ca.us> Columbia Basin Bulletin Salmon Survival: It?s All About The Early Days In The Ocean And 2010 Tough To Call Posted on Friday, January 07, 2011 (PST) Ocean conditions off the coast of Oregon and Washington changed from nightmarish to dreamy for juvenile salmon this past late spring-early summer and in the process confounded experts? efforts to predict how those young fish may have fared. ?The fact that ocean conditions were poor early in the season but great later in summer makes it impossible to provide any reliable forecast this year: our best ?guess? is that we can expect near ?average? returns in 2011 (for coho) and 2012 (for chinook),? according to the Northwest Fisheries Science Center?s annual qualitative prediction of future returns. ?We do not think that the El Ni?o had a devastating effect on salmon because the warm ocean conditions at the time of ocean entry (in April/May) were about ?average.?? NOAA Fisheries? NWFSC has over the past 13 years developed a suite of ocean ecosystem ?indicators? that are monitored and the data then used to estimate what kind of an impact they might have had on juvenile salmon during the earliest stage of their ocean sojourn. Basically, the better the survival early on, the more fish are expected to survive to adulthood to return to the Columbia River basin to spawn. Each of the 18 or so indicators is rated for the year as good, neutral or bad. Then they are compared individually to past measurements and, as was the case this year, given a score of from 1 (the best combined score over the course of the study) to 13 (the worst). The run-size forecasts are based on the average score for the indicators overall. The mean of those scores for 2010 ranked the year eighth out of 13, which would indicate slightly below average overall conditions for coho and spring chinook salmon that ventured to sea last spring. The forecasts are for the first year that species? begin to return as fully matured adults, in the coho?s case after one year in the Pacific and the spring chinook after two years. ?There?s some hints that it was not that terrible? for young fish that typically would have entered the ocean before conditions turned from bad to good, said Bill Peterson, NOAA Fisheries oceanographer and senior scientist. The number of coho jacks that returned, as counted at Bonneville Dam, after just a few months in the ocean was in the average range, he said. The strength of a jack return can mirror the strength of broodmate returns in succeeding years. In the California current that hugs the coast, and elsewhere, cold is good for salmon. ?Because of the 2009-10 El Ni?o event, the ocean began to warm in autumn 2009 and remained warm through April 2010, after which a cooling trend resumed in May 2010,? the forecast says. The El Nino/Southern Oscillation is the measure of sea surface temperatures in the equatorial Pacific that can affect climate worldwide. ?Thus, 2010 began as a ?warm year,? began to cool in May but by July, the ocean was the coldest observed in recent years. Thus we had very mixed signals in 2010 making it difficult to offer any reliable outlooks in returns of coho salmon in 2010 and chinook salmon in 2012,? the forecast says. ?During the tail end of the El Ni?o, in May and June, we had some of the worst ocean conditions we?ve seen in the 13 years we?ve been sampling,? Peterson said. ?Then in July, the conditions were as good as they?ve ever been. So it?s a question of timing? and what the fish did once they entered the ocean. Coho tend to hang out not too far off the coast and not too deep. The spring chinook don?t seem to dawdle too long before charging north up the continental shelf to parts unknown. At the time of the young fishes entry, ?the ocean really was kind two-layered? with warm surface water and cool water deeper that was relatively plentiful in terms of nutrients on which juvenile salmon feed. Survival may have depended on ?if they had enough sense to go deeper,? Peterson said. Coho and steelhead have a more shallow orientation than chinook. ?Vertical structure is really something we?ve really not thought about,? Peterson said. For the past 13 years, Peterson and his colleagues have conducting trawl surveys funded by the Bonneville Power Administration in June and September from Cape Perpetua to La Push, Wash., counting the abundance of juvenile salmon along the near-shore waters of the West Coast. The survival rate of juvenile salmon is the key indicator for future salmon runs, says Peterson. When salmon first enter the ocean, they must have enough food to not only survive, but to grow rapidly enough to avoid predation. The smaller they are, the more vulnerable they are to potential predators lurking offshore. And when ocean productivity is high, populations of other fish like herring, anchovies and sardines grow and provide alternatives for the predators. Peterson said the juvenile chinook counted this summer was the fifth highest they?ve had in their 13 years, raising hope for future chinook runs. But the season?s mixed bag continued ?We caught almost no juvenile coho salmon in September and that worries me,? Peterson said. ?We?ll find out soon enough,? he said. ?Coho return as adults after 18 months; spring chinook come back after two years and fall chinook, three years or longer. If these fish can make it to adulthood, they should be fine. There?s not much that out there that feeds on them other than sea lions and orcas. ?It?s all about how they fare as youngsters,? he added, ?and the jury is definitely still out this year.? If the cool La Nina and negative Pacific Decadal Oscillation keep their grip, conditions should be much improved by the time this year?s class ventures out. SST anomalies were consistently colder than normal by several degrees during the summer of 2010 and the deep water temperatures on the continental shelf in July-August were the coldest of the 13-year record. And the biomass of the lipid-rich ?northern? copepod species was the third highest on record during the summer of 2010. The northern copepods are a key link in the food chain. The negative signals dominated early in the spring-summer season. The PDO was positive (generally considered bad for salmon) and SSTs were warm during the winter of 2009-2010 indicating poor ocean conditions during the winter. The PDO is a climate index based upon patterns of variation in sea surface temperature of the North Pacific from 1900 to the present. While derived from sea surface temperature data, the PDO index is well correlated with many records of North Pacific and Pacific Northwest climate and ecology, including sea level pressure, winter land-surface temperature and precipitation, and stream flow,? according to information posted on NWFSC?s ?Ocean Ecosystem Indicators of Salmon Marine Survival in the Northern California Current? web site. That site is located at: http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/research/divisions/fed/oeip/a-ecinhome.cfm The index is also correlated with salmon landings from Alaska, Washington, Oregon and California. ?Although the winter storms ended in late March and the upwelling season was initiated on 5 April, strong upwelling was not initiated until two months later, on 9 June,? according to the forecast. The length and strength of the upwelling is indicative of the availability of fish food delivered to the surface. ?Within that two months period several southwest storms moved through the region. This is generally a negative sign for salmon that enter the ocean in April-May,? the forecast says. ?Copepod species richness was very high during winter-spring-summer of 2010, ranking 11 of 13 from May-September. We regard this as a negative sign because it indicates that the sub-tropical species that were brought to Oregon with the El Ni?o persisted for several months after the end of the El Ni?o event; species richness did not return to normal until autumn 2010.? Bookmark and Share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Jan 7 17:51:14 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 17:51:14 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Eureka Times Standard 1 6 11 Message-ID: <00b301cbaed6$8b036140$a10a23c0$@net> Fishing the North Coast: Rivers turn green - steelhead await Kenny Priest/For the Times-Standard Posted: 01/06/2011 09:35:32 AM PST Click photo to enlarge Michael Carroll, left and 12 year old son Gannon of... (Photo courtesy of Tyler Bachmann Fishing) * < * 1 * > http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site127/2011/0106/20110106__FNC_ VIEWER.jpg The rain has stopped and the southern rivers are turning green - it's now steelhead time. After what seems like an eternity, the rain has finally given way to sunshine - allowing rivers like Redwood Creek, Mad, So Fork Eel, Van Duzen, and the Mattole to recede and clear. Other than the Mad, most of these rivers haven't seen a boat or an angler since the middle of December when the rains came and wiped out the tail end of the salmon season. No one knows for sure if the steelhead will be here, but based on the numbers of salmon that returned to the coastal rivers, we could be in for an exceptional season. We should have a real good idea after this weekend. With most of the rivers back to fishable levels this weekend, there should be plenty of options for local steelhead anglers. This should take a little pressure off the Chetco and Smith, which have been fishing for a week now and giving up some good numbers. Upper Trinity Steve Huber of Steve Huber's Guide Service reports the fishing has been real good from Douglas City down to Junction City. "The river is in absolute perfect shape, with just a little color and I've been able to put together a couple real good days - with Monday being as good as it gets as we hooked and landed seven fish. There's certainly a good amount of fish in the river and the boat traffic has been light. Almost all my fish are coming on plugs, but anglers using bait are also doing well," Huber said. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6937 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Jan 7 17:54:33 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 17:54:33 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle `1 7 11 Message-ID: <00b901cbaed7$00b7ac70$02270550$@net> Plan to mine gravel in Russian River draws fire Peter Fimrite, Chronicle Staff Writer San Francisco Chronicle January 7, 2011 04:00 AM Copyright San Francisco Chronicle. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Friday, January 7, 2011 * Assembly bill caps public worker pensions 01.07.11 A lawsuit was filed Thursday challenging a plan to resume gravel mining in the Russian River through the picturesque Alexander Valley , the first project of its kind in a decade. The conservationist groups Russian Riverkeeper and the Redwood Empire chapter of Trout Unlimited sued the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors over the board's approval of a plan to combine in-stream gravel mining with habitat restoration along 6.5 miles of the river near Geyserville . "This approval fast-tracks the mining of gravel at a rate beyond what nature can replenish," said Don McEnhill, executive director of Russian Riverkeeper. The proposal by Syar Industries Inc. was approved by the supervisors Dec. 7 . It calls for the restoration of native grasses along 26 acres of the river and the annual removal of 350,000 tons of gravel for 15 years. Workers would shore up eroding banks next to vineyards. The removal of millions of tons of gravel from the Russian River over the past century has been blamed for ruining water quality and helping wipe out tens of thousands of fish. As many as 80,000 coho salmon once spawned in the Russian River, but the species is now functionally extinct in the watershed. "Our kids and grandkids should be able to have the experience of finding, and maybe even catching, native California trout, salmon and steelhead in their historic range," said Julie Carlson, president of the local chapter of Trout Unlimited. "That is our vision." Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov Wed Jan 12 12:13:17 2011 From: Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov (Weseloh, Tom) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:13:17 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker/FOTR to be recognized 1-18-11 Message-ID: <92EDAFA5BE10AE4E8E936FD80BC857090770527EF1@ASMMSX05.calegis.net> Byron Leydecker, Chair of Friends of Trinity River, will be recognized for 18 years of effort contributing to the restoration and protection of the Trinity River. The recognition will take place at the Trinity County Board of Supervisors meeting in Weaverville on Jan. 18, 2011 and will likely occur between 9:00-9:30am. I hope to see many of you there! Tom Weseloh Consultant Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture c/o Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro 710 E St. Suite 150 Eureka, CA 95501 707.445.7014 ext. 10 tom.weseloh at asm.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Jan 13 10:55:03 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:55:03 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: CVPIA Public Meeting February 17 from 1-4pm at Cottage Way, Sacramento Message-ID: <001801cbb353$67fde0e0$37f9a2a0$@net> From: Kaplan, Shana M [mailto:SKaplan at usbr.gov] Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 9:23 AM To: mreid at tcouncil.com; csrancheriacedd at netptc.net; nfrchair at netptc.net; maidu10 at hotmail.com; office at paskenta.org; hayden at snowcrest.net; heatherhostler at hoppa-nsn.gov; Subject: CVPIA Public Meeting February 17 from 1-4pm at Cottage Way, Sacramento Hello Everyone - This is an early notification of our upcoming meeting to discuss CVPIA fiscal year 2011 annual work plans. The format will generally be the same as in previous years, in that we will present FY 2010 accomplishments and FY 2011 plans. CVPIA Annual Work Plans Public Meeting February 17, 2011 Agenda 1:00 p.m. Introductions and Opening Comments (Program Administrators) 1:15 p.m. Anadromous Fish Restoration Program - Section 3406(b)(1) Ramon Martin 1:45 p.m. Contra Costa Canal Pumping Plant - Section 3406 (b)(5) Carl Dealy 2:15 p.m. Red Bluff Diversion Dam - Section 3406 (b)(10) Bill Vanderwaal 2:45 p.m. Anadromous Fish Screen Program - Section 3406 (b)(21) Dan Meier 3:15 p.m. Trinity River Restoration Program- Section 3406 (b)(1)"other" & (b)(23) Jennifer Faler 3:45 p.m. Closing Comments and Adjourn (Shana Kaplan & Cesar Blanco) The meeting will be held: Sacramento Thursday, February 17, 2011 1 - 4 p.m. Federal Building, 2800 Cottage Way Conference Room C-1001 and 1002 The CVPIA Annual Work Plans for FY 2011 will be available after Monday, January 31, 2011, on the Internet at: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvpia/docs_reports/awp/2011/index.html. Under the heading "Annual Workplan Drafts", click on "FY 2011." For additional information, please contact Ms. Evelyn Erlandsen in Reclamation's Resources Management Division at 916-978-5214 or e-mail eerlandsen at usbr.gov Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you, Shana Kaplan CVPIA Program Manager U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Sacramento, CA (916) 978-5190 cell (916) 952-9588 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Jan 13 11:00:34 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:00:34 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Riverside Press-Enterprise 1-12-11 Message-ID: <001d01cbb354$2a4ec060$7eec4120$@net> Water peril 10:00 PM PST on Wednesday, January 12, 2011 The Press-Enterprise The recent heavy rains do not resolve the water challenges facing the state. State and local elected officials, water agencies and consumers all have roles to play in securing an ample long-term supply of water. And that task requires addressing threats to the state's primary water system, expanding water storage and making more efficient use of existing supplies. The heavy precipitation of late December and early January was good news for a state that wrestles with drought. The state's mountain snowpack stands at nearly twice normal levels for this point in the year, the state Department of Water resources announced late last month. The mountain snow, which melts and runs off in the hot summer months, is a key source of water for California. The water agency said the high snow levels would likely increase the deliveries available through the State Water Project, which sends water from Northern California to drier areas of the state. The agency last year projected it could supply 50 percent of the exports for 2011 requested by water providers across the state, but now says that figure will go higher. Californians should not let that good news lull them into complacency, however. State and local government, water agencies and average residents still have much to do in ensuring sufficient water for a state with large arid regions and a growing population. The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta remains in danger, for example. Water that flows through the estuary serves two-thirds of the state's population and irrigates millions of acres of farmland. Yet the delta faces threats from environmental decline and eroding levees that put future water exports at risk. The most sensible solution is a channel to send water around the delta, which would protect exports while easing environmental woes. But that idea remains a political flashpoint. The state also needs to boost oversight of pumping from underground aquifers, which account for 30 percent of California water supplies. The Legislature took the first steps toward monitoring groundwater use in 2009. But the state cannot afford to let those with groundwater rights recklessly drain a crucial source of water. The recent rains also highlight the need for state and local agencies to expand efforts to catch and store storm-water runoff. The state's long-range climate projections suggest that in coming decades, mountain snow will not conveniently store enough water for summer. Instead, the state will need to collect more winter rain to supply the dry months. And California will need to boost efforts statewide to conserve, recycle and reuse enough water for the future. Rain and snow are always welcome in a state that suffers periodic droughts. But while big storms help, California needs a more viable long-term water policy than relying on wet winters alone. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Thu Jan 13 11:47:08 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:47:08 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Water_worries_Important_meeting_is?= =?windows-1252?q?_packed_to_the_gills=2C_but_what=92s_the_plan=3F?= Message-ID: Water worries: Important meeting is packed to the gills, but what?s the plan? http://www.newsreview.com/chico/content?oid=1906175 By Tom Gascoyne CHICO NEWS & REVIEW More stories by this author... This article was published on 01.13.11. Many locals interested in preserving the North State?s water resources turned up for the water meeting hosted by the Bureau of Reclamation. PHOTO BY DUGAN GASCOYNE Close to 200 people, an unusual admixture of farmers and environmentalists, jammed into a conference room in the Chico Masonic Center Tuesday evening (Jan. 11) to listen and then give input on proposed water transfers from sellers in the North State to buyers in the south scheduled to span the next decade. Lacking, however, was any clear description of the transfer plan. The meeting was hosted by the federal Bureau of Reclamation?the largest wholesale water supplier in the United States?and a state water district called the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, which represents agricultural water districts in the south. According to its printed agenda, the purpose of the meeting was three-fold: Provide information about creating an environmental-impact statement and report; gather input from the public on alternatives and environmental issues; and answer questions. But it was obvious early on that a vast majority of those in attendance were a bit suspicious about the real intentions of those putting on the meeting. Before the festivities began, Louis Moore, a spokesman for the Bureau of Reclamation, offered a verbal explanation for the meeting. ?It enables us to go out to the public and share with them what we?ve heard and what we?ve developed up to this point,? he said. ?And it allows the public to comment on what we?ve presented.? Brad Hubbard, also with the bureau, addressed the gathering with a slide show and said there was no specific project defined yet. ?We have a general scope that we are going to present tonight,? he said. ?There are no designs; there are no project descriptions available yet. We are not going to get that together until we hear from you, go through the scoping meetings, get the final comments and develop the alternatives.? *Barbara Vlamis, executive director* of local water-protection group AquAlliance, said the information offered was much too vague to elicit any meaningful comment. ?How do they expect to get any kind of input on whatever impacts there could be if you don?t even know what the project is?? she asked. Vlamis did allow that having a public meeting on proposed water transfers was something she as an environmentalist had been requesting for decades. She referred to the bureau?s literature that specifically mentions it will abide by current guidelines capping transfers to 600,000 acre-feet of water each year. ?That is what they are going to study,? she said. ?Whether they transfer it or not, we don?t know.? Local environmental attorney Richard Harriman said the meeting was not being run by the rules set out by the California Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. ?You can?t go forward with commentary without having a project description,? Harriman said. ?This is simply an improper procedure in terms of the law. We need to have another meeting where we know what the project description is.? And so it went, with a couple dozen public comments, all questioning or downright condemning the proposed water transfers. At the end, Hubbard, from the bureau, said he wasn?t surprised by the tenor of the meeting. ?We knew before coming in here that people were going to be a little emotionally charged,? he said. Hubbard had two more of these meetings to address, one in Sacramento the following night and one in Los Banos on Thursday (Jan. 13). He said he didn?t expect nearly the same amount of emotional outpouring at either as the meetings head south. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sperez at 5counties.org Wed Jan 19 09:40:54 2011 From: sperez at 5counties.org (Sandra Perez) Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:40:54 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] 5 Counties Salmonid Conservation Program job opening Message-ID: <000c01cbb800$0665b270$13311750$@org> 5C PROGRAM PROJECT MANAGER (full time). Develop, secure funding for, and administer restoration projects (e.g., fish passage improvements, sediment reduction). Coordinate on fiscal management and other project aspects. Position description, requirements, application, and more information at www.5counties.org or call 530.623.3967 x114. Closes 01/31/2011. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Wed Jan 19 13:36:43 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:36:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Golden Gate Salmon Association Message-ID: <000f01cbb820$f90ca1d0$eb25e570$@net> For Immediate Release January 17, 2011 Golden Gate Salmon Association (GGSA) Launches Salmon Recovery Actions GGSA joins the Sacramento International Sportsmen's Exposition in its first public forum The new Golden Gate Salmon Association will participate in the International Sportsmen's Exposition show January 20th - 23 in Sacramento at the Cal Expo Center. Interested individuals can pick up literature about GGSA or join the organization at Water4Fish booth 3340, the Clarks Outdoor Adventure booth or Johnson Hicks Marine booth 3146. These booths are in C building. Those joining GGSA at the show will be entered in a raffle for a one day fishing trip with Wacky Jacky out of SF, The New Sea Angler out of Bodega Bay or the Salty Lady out of Sausalito. The Golden Gate Salmon Association was recently formed by a coalition of commercial, recreational and environmental salmon leaders. Its purpose is to provide financial and manpower resources to assist in the recovery of the Central Valley salmon through legal, public relations, lobbying and science activities. The GGSA is a member based regional nonprofit organization whose principal objective is the revival, protection and enhancement of the Central Valley salmon and their habitat and the furtherance of our sustainable recreational and commercial fishing culture through working with elected officials, regulatory agencies and other legal, educational and outreach organizations. The organization will begin a series of fundraising dinners early in 2011. Mr. Victor Gonella is the President of GGSA and one of its principal organizers. He says, "The salmon collapse of Northern California is a travesty. In spite of hundreds of individuals and dozens of organizations working on recovery, the runs continue to decline towards extinction. GGSA will bring new funding and new resources to attack this problem. We encourage everyone who cares about salmon to join us and volunteer for one of our committees. The committees are: Administration and Finance, Government Affairs, Membership and Public Relations, Fundraising, and Science. Dues are $25." GGSA starts with a powerful and committed Board of Directors with diverse skills and backgrounds. Those designated so far include Dan Bacher of the Fish Sniffer, Jim Caito of Caito Fisheries, Ron Davis of Davis Appraisals, Ken Elie of Outdoor Pro Shop, Victor Gonella of Autoworld, Zeke Grader of PCFFA, Jonah Li of Hi's Tackle Box, John McManus of Earth Justice, Barry Nelson of NRDC, Galen Onizuka of Johnson Hicks Marine, Dick Pool of Pro-Troll Fishing Products, Rick Powers of Bodega Bay Sportfishing, Roger Thomas of Golden Gate Fishermen's Association, and David Zeff of David Zeff Attorneys. Brian Layng is CEO of the International Sportsmen's Expositions. He says, "We are very encouraged and optimistic about the Golden Gate Salmon Association. We all need to be more active in recovering the salmon and this organization will give us the clout we need. I encourage everyone to participate and support this organization." Contacts: Victor Gonella (707) 762-2712 Dick Pool (925) 963-6350 Zeke Grader (415) 606-5140 Roger Thomas (415) 760-9362 Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Thu Jan 20 11:00:41 2011 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:00:41 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Charter signed by the Secretary of the Interior Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Secretary of the Interior renewed the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group. The charter was signed on January 14, 2011. Billing Code: 4310-55 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of the Secretary Renewal of the Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), after consultation with the General Services Administration, has renewed the Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group (Working Group) for 2 years. The Working Group provides recommendations on all aspects of the implementation of the Trinity River Restoration Program and affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River restoration efforts. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Brown, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; 707-822-7201. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Working Group conducts its operations in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Appendix). It reports to the Trinity River Management Council (TMC) and functions solely as an advisory body. The TMC reports to the Secretary through the Mid-Pacific Regional Director of the Bureau of Reclamation and the Pacific Southwest Regional Director (Region 8) for the Fish and Wildlife Service. The Working Group provides recommendations and advice to the TMC on: (1) the effectiveness of management actions in achieving restoration goals and alternative hypotheses (methods and strategies) for study, (2) the priority for restoration projects, (3) funding priorities, and (4) other components of the Trinity River Restoration Program. Working Group members represent the varied interests associated with the Trinity River Restoration Program. Members are selected from, but not limited to, Trinity County residents, recreational and commercial fishermen, commercial and recreational boaters, power/utility companies, agricultural water users, private and commercial timber producers, ranchers and people with grazing rights/permits, tribes, environmental organizations, and Federal, State, and local agencies with responsibilities in the Trinity River Basin. Members must be senior representatives of their respective constituent groups with knowledge of the Trinity River Restoration Program, including the Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management Program. We have filed a copy of the Working Group's charter with the Committee Management Secretariat, General Services Administration; Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate; Committee on Natural Resources, United States House of Representatives; and the Library of Congress. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group is necessary and is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the Department of the Interior by Public Laws 84-386 and 96-335 (Trinity River Stream Rectification Act), 98-541 and 104-143 (Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Act of 1984), and 102-575 (Central Valley Project Improvement Act). The Working Group will assist the Department of the Interior by providing advice and recommendations on all aspects of implementation of the Trinity River Restoration Program. Date: _January 14, 2011___ _________________ __ _____________ Ken Salazar Secretary of the Interior Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Jan 20 15:23:32 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 15:23:32 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] House Natural Resources Committee Members 112th Congress Message-ID: <00b101cbb8f9$0e3123a0$2a936ae0$@net> Five Californians on Committee. George Miller is not a member. The end of an era. NATURAL RESOURCES DEMOCRATS in the 112th CONGRESS The committee consists of 48 Members, 27 Republicans and 21 Democrats. Republican Majority Doc Hastings, WA-04 Chairman * Don Young, AK-at large * John Duncan, TN-02 * Louie Gohmert, TX-01 * Rob Bishop, UT-01 * Doug Lamborn, CO-05 * Robert Wittman, VA-01 * Paul Broun, GA-10 * John Fleming, LA-04 * Mike Coffman, CO-06 * Tom McClintock, CA-04 * Glenn Thompson, PA-5 * Jeff Denham, CA-19 * Dan Benishek, MI-01 * David Rivera, FL-25 * Jeff Duncan, SC-03 * Scott Tipton, CO-03 * Paul Gosar, AZ-01 * Ra?l Labrador, ID-01 * Kristi Noem, SD-at large * Steve Southerland, FL-02 * Bill Flores, TX-17 * Andy Harris, MD-01 * Jeff Landry, LA-03 * Chuck Fleischmann, TN-03 * Jon Runyan, NJ-03 * Bill Johnson, OH-06 Democratic Minority Edward Markey, MA-07 Ranking Minority Member * Dale Kildee, MI-05 * Peter DeFazio, OR-04 * Eni Faleomavaega, AS-at-large * Frank Pallone, NJ-06 * Grace Napolitano, CA-38 * Rush Holt, NJ-12 * Ra?l Grijalva, AZ-07 * Madeleine Bordallo, GU-at-large * Jim Costa, CA-20 * Dan Boren, OK-02 * Gregorio Sablan, NMI-at-large * Martin Heinrich, NM-01 * Ben Luj?n, NM-03 * Donna Christensen, VI-at-large * John Sarbanes, MD-03 * Betty Sutton, OH-13 * Niki Tsongas, MA-05 * Pedro Pierluisi, PR-at-large * John Garamendi, CA-10 * Colleen Hanabusa, HI-01 Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Picture (Device Independent Bitmap) 1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5244 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Picture (Device Independent Bitmap) 2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4870 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Jan 20 15:53:03 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 15:53:03 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Contra Costa Timwes 1 20 11 Message-ID: <00c201cbb8fd$2fd647c0$8f82d740$@net> Panel seeks public input on Delta water issues New effort to tackle water supply reliability and ecosystem restoration. By Mike Taugher Contra Costa Times Posted: 01/19/2011 04:21:52 PM PST Updated: 01/20/2011 06:09:39 AM PST The state has hit the pause button on one fast-moving Delta plan but another equally speedy one gets under way this week and it could determine the estuary's future. The newly formed Delta Stewardship Council, which is to develop a plan to restore and protect the estuary, scheduled its Bay Area stop Thursday in Concord. Its Delta Plan, mandated by 2009 state law, is meant to be a legally enforceable long-term strategy for a more reliable supply of Delta water to farms and cities and to restore the Delta's imperiled ecosystem. It is required to do so in a way that protects Delta communities. The Stewardship Council plan will touch on how water is used statewide, flood safety and other issues. A first draft is due out next month and the plan must be done by the end of the year. That's a highly ambitious schedule, and it is not clear how specific the plan will get. For example, will it embrace tunnels to deliver water south from the Sacramento River or rule them out? And if it embraces them, will it recommend a particular size? Will it make determinations of how much water is available to pump out of the Delta? In any case, it will have to address the conflict at the heart of the problems in the Delta -- the conflict between a seemingly unlimited thirst and a limited, and thanks to global warming, uncertain, water supply, said the chairman of the council. "It's going to be fairly sober on the need to live within our means," said Phil Isenberg, chairman of the Delta Stewardship Council. The Delta supplies water for about two-thirds of Californians. Some, like 500,000 Contra Costa residents, get all of their water from it. Others, like those in Southern California, rely on the Delta for about one-third of their water. Two batteries of pumps near Tracy also supply irrigation water to about 2 million acres of San Joaquin Valley farmland. The meeting in Concord is one of seven up and down the state being held through Tuesday. The idea is to gather as many ideas as possible from the public to help shape the plan. It also will set standards that local governments, including Contra Costa County and East Contra Costa cities, will have to comply with, especially in land use. Wetlands restoration plans could reduce property tax revenue if they take agricultural lands out of production, a sensitive issue for local governments. "We keep trying to get our foot in the door -- don't forget the impacts on local government," said Contra Costa County Supervisor Mary Piepho, whose district includes portions of the Delta, including Discovery Bay. The Delta Plan is mandated by state law and is under the guidance of the newly formed Delta Stewardship Council. By contrast, the Bay Delta Conservation Plan is less sweeping in that it is essentially a strategy to comply with endangered species laws by building a canal, or tunnels, to move water and to restore wetlands to improve conditions for fish. The Bay Delta Conservation Plan is mostly driven by contracting water agencies that take water out of the Delta, but its steering committee also includes environmentalists and government biologists. It is on hold for now as the Jerry Brown administration takes stock and consultants rush to complete an extensive scientific analysis. That analysis is meant to determine whether fish populations will be helped or harmed by the $12 billion plan to take Sacramento River water through tunnels beneath the Delta and to restore wetlands. Federal biologists have been critical of the work, but the consultants have been trying to address the criticisms and hope to have a report done this month or in February. The big question is whether routing water past the Delta from modern intakes on the Sacramento River, rather than the Tracy pumps, and restoring wetlands is enough to justify the amount of water farms and cities south of the Delta want. If the answer is no -- that less water is available -- that could lead agencies to determine that the project does not make financial sense. If the Bay Delta Conservation Plan bypasses make sense, the Delta Stewardship Council must include it -- with a peripheral canal or tunnels carrying water under the Delta -- in the Delta Plan. Thursday's meeting is from 6 to 8:30 p.m. at the Concord Senior Center, 2727 Parkside Circle. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Jan 20 16:02:34 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:02:34 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Contra Costa Times 1 20 11 Message-ID: <00c701cbb8fe$8283f0c0$878bd240$@net> UC expert compares problems in the Delta to New Orleans before Hurricane Katrina. By Mike Taugher Contra Costa Times Posted: 01/19/2011 04:05:59 PM PST Updated: 01/20/2011 06:17:04 AM PST Click photo to enlarge http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site568/2011/0119/20110119__leve e~1_VIEWER.JPG An excavator tractor working for the Department of Water Resources works on... ( JIM STEVENS ) . < . 1http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site568/2011/0119/20110119__lev ee~1_VIEWER.JPGhttp://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site568/2011/0119 /20110119__levee~2_VIEWER.JPGhttp://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/sit e568/2011/0119/20110119__levee~3_VIEWER.JPG Bob Bea has investigated such high-profile disasters as the Exxon Valdez spill, the Deepwater Horizon blast, Hurricane Katrina and the space shuttle Columbia, which exploded in 2003. But the UC engineer and associate director of the Center for Catastrophic Risk Management says the problems looming in the Delta dwarf the others because of the vulnerability of levees and the threat that poses to drinking water, power, transportation and other infrastructure. "It's the worst damn mess I've ever seen, and I've seen some pretty bad ones," Bea told a Contra Costa water task force in Pleasant Hill on Wednesday. The problem is not just the conflict between the Delta's ecosystem and the demand for water. It is flood safety and the risks that levee failure poses to a web of aqueducts, power lines, telecommunications, highways and rail lines. The levees and other infrastructure are getting older, the risks are getting larger and no one seems to know how to untangle the "Gordian knot." "We've got this infrastructure that is powering a very critical economic engine," Bea said, adding that the Delta is on a "roadmap to disaster." Bea and a team of researchers are about halfway through a four-year study of how to assess and manage threats in the Delta, which touches five counties and provides a portion of water for two-thirds of Californians. The most immediate thing that can be done is to get the operators of the Delta's aqueducts, power lines, railroads and highways communicating better now so that the response in an emergency will be smoother, said Bea's colleague, Emery Roe, a policy analyst at UC and Mills College. Some of those who attended the meeting, hosted by the Contra Costa Council's water task force, questioned whether the Delta's levees are really that fragile. Many of the region's levees date to the Gold Rush and they could fail in a large earthquake or flood, allowing water to rush into the farms and developments built below sea level and contaminate drinking water with salt water from San Francisco Bay. Previous studies on the Delta's levees have been hurried or were susceptible to political pressure, a few levee engineers said. Many Delta residents contend state government has a political interest in making the levees appear vulnerable because that boosts the argument for a peripheral canal or tunnels to divert water around the area. If a canal or tunnels were built, a levee failure might no longer cause seawater to intrude into drinking water supplies, although flooding would still inundate farms and, potentially, houses. Bea agreed many previous studies were flawed, but added that he had yet to see an analysis that showed there is no problem in the Delta. The risk of flooding, he contends, is great. And like New Orleans before Hurricane Katrina, Delta experts know about the problems while little is getting done to address them. There are two basic ways to cope, Bea said. California can adopt a "stand and fight" approach to maintain and repair levees or it can adopt a "strategic retreat" in which highways, railroads, aqueducts and power lines are gradually moved out of harm's way. When the Delta's bowl-like islands are flooded, perhaps they could be left that way. Neither of those approaches, however, provides a clear way to address the Delta's fundamental conflict between water supplies and its ecosystem. A canal or tunnel to move water outside the levee-lined channels would come with its own risks, Bea said. "The water (issue) is the devil we can't see through yet," Bea said. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image010.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 27982 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image011.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 32090 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image012.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 32048 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Jan 21 11:15:54 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:15:54 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SJ Mercury News 1 21 2011 Message-ID: <014101cbb99f$a2278a30$e6769e90$@net> Brown puts longtime environmental advocate in charge of state delta policy By Paul Rogers Gov. Jerry Brown has named a prominent environmental leader and renowned whitewater kayaker as his top official on Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta water issues. Brown tapped Jerry Meral to be deputy secretary of the California Natural Resources Agency in charge of the Bay Delta Conservation Planning Program. Meral, 66 of Inverness, is a registered Democrat who served as deputy director of the state Department of Water Resources during Brown's administration in the early 1980s. After that, he was executive director of the Planning and Conservation League, one of the state's most influential environmental lobbying groups, until 2003. Meral, a legendary kayaker for whom Meral's Pool is named on the Tuolumne River near Yosemite National Park, led efforts in the 1970s, '80s and '90s against the construction of large dams, helping found Friends of the River and the Tuolumne River Trust. He served on the board of the Sierra Fund and Restore Hetch Hetchy. The Delta is the most important drinking water source in California, providing water for more than 20 million people and irrigation for millions of acres of farmland. The Delta has been at the center of conflicts in recent years, however, as its fish populations have crashed and cities and farms have struggled to find ways to draw more water, more reliably, from it. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Jan 21 13:21:48 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:21:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Weir Totals Hatchery Count Message-ID: <016901cbb9b1$38f436f0$aadca4d0$@net> Folks, Attached is the most recent update for the hatchery and completed season totals for the weirs. Let me know if you have any questions. Wade Sinnen Associate Biologist Trinity River Project CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weirTRH_summary 1 21 11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 93184 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jan 25 07:16:00 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 07:16:00 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal 1 19 2011- Leydecker recognized Message-ID: <2E0288E742244C1C84A3CED91AA0B96A@homeuserPC> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-01-19/News/Leydecker_recognized_for_longtime_Trinity_River_ef.html Leydecker recognized for longtime Trinity River efforts BY SALLY MORRIS THE TRINITY JOURNAL Byron Leydecker was honored before the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday for his efforts on behalf of the Trinity River, shown behind him. Trinity County supervisors Tuesday congratulated and honored Friends of Trinity River founder Byron Leydecker of Mill Valley for his 18 years of commitment to restoring the Trinity River and his leadership in that effort. At 83, Leydecker announced last month he is retiring and the organization he founded in 1992 to protect and restore the Trinity River and its tributaries will cease operations. A former California county supervisor who's been fishing on the Trinity River since the 1930s, Leydecker jumped into the restoration efforts after getting stuck standing in sediment while fishing the Trinity. He filed a cease and desist order with the State Water Quality Control Board over what he felt was a poorly conceived and designed restoration program and soon thereafter founded and began managing the Friends of Trinity River advocacy group. In the resolution of appreciation presented by Trinity County supervisors, Leydecker's efforts were cited as being instrumental in helping to obtain Congressional reauthorization of the Trinity River Restoration Program and leading a major grassroots campaign to influence the Interior Secretary's decision to increase instream flows. Dubbed an unsung hero to countless local fishing guides, rafting owners, and hotel and restaurant owners, Leydecker was commended in the board's resolution for an "unstoppable drive and dedication to ensure that these local business owners and their employees all are able to continue to make a living in this rural part of California." Noting that his work was performed without any compensation and at great personal expense to save a natural resource in a county that has never been his home, the board thanked Leydecker for his personal and professional sacrifices, declaring that wherever his future travels take him, he is "from this moment forward, an honorary citizen of the County of Trinity." "I am a fellow fisherman and want to say that nobody has done more to restore the Trinity River," said Sup. Roger Jaegel. Leydecker was presented Tuesday with several other awards for distinguished service by the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, the U.S. House of Representatives and California Legislature. Leydecker accepted the accolades on behalf of "the many, many supporters and volunteers associated with Friends of Trinity River over the years that have made a difference." He recounted working with more than 100 volunteers one Saturday in Eureka and Arcata to distribute 20,000 door hangers with tear-off postcards to send to former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt "urging him to return the maximum flow to the Trinity River." He said the grassroots campaign to restore the Trinity resulted in the greatest number of comments on an EIR and its recommendation of returning flows to the river of any environmental document ever received by the Department of Interior before. Leydecker said the honors presented "name me, but I really see it as recognition of literally hundreds of people and I accept with very great appreciation for all of their work." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8276 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Jan 27 14:27:48 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 14:27:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Delta Plan Scoping Recommendations Message-ID: <003a01cbbe71$6f08f130$4d1ad390$@net> Attached is the formal document of 30 organizations for inclusion in the EIR process for the Delta Plan. This package includes our scoping recommendations which were presented at the Stockton meeting on January 25. It also includes our cover letter as well as logos and signatures of the 30 organizations supporting our recommendations. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Delta Plan Scoping Docs Final.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 2592768 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jan 28 11:05:55 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:05:55 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Environmental groups ask feds to protect spring chinook; petition considers fall and spring runs distinct enough to be separate Message-ID: <117C7570F49C42DB8BA4C05D4E6F0198@homeuserPC> Environmental groups ask feds to protect spring chinook; petition considers fall and spring runs distinct enough to be separate John Driscoll/The Times-Standard Posted: 01/28/2011 01:24:24 AM PST http://www.times-standard.com/news/ci_17225908 Four environmental groups are asking the federal government to impose Endangered Species Act protections for another one of the Klamath River basin's struggling salmon stocks. Spring-run chinook salmon should be considered separate from the more numerous fall-run chinook, the Environmental Protection Information Center, the Center for Biological Diversity, Oregon Wild and the Larch Co. maintain in their petition to the National Marine Fisheries Service. That agency currently does not distinguish between the two runs on a technical basis, and the groups acknowledge that NMFS could choose to protect both spring and fall chinook, though fall chinook make up the core of the tribal and sport fishery in the river, and are a key element of the ocean commercial fishery. Scott Greacen with EPIC said that an Endangered Species Act listing of spring chinook would draw more attention to the precarious position of the fish and force restoration efforts to more seriously consider them. "This puts it on the table as a core issue," Greacen said. The decline in spring chinook -- once the dominant run in the watershed -- is in large part due to four dams that have cut off hundreds of miles of spawning grounds in the Upper Klamath Basin. Fishing, water diversions, logging and other practices have all taken their toll. Spring chinook are now largely contained in the Salmon, Scott, Shasta and South Fork Trinity rivers, and number between 300 and 3,000. "Springers" migrate upstream beginning in March, spawn in the late summer and fall, and some juveniles migrate to sea quickly while others wait until the following spring. Fall chinook, on the other hand, average about 120,000 a year, with about half of that number being hatchery-bred fish. They migrate in the late summer and early fall, and their young migrate out more quickly. The petitioners say the difference in behavior and genetic distinctions make the two runs separate, and they should qualify as distinct. A spokesman for the National Marine Fisheries Service said the agency has not viewed the petition and could not comment on it. The states of California and Oregon, several tribes and fishing and environmental groups have signed an agreement to tear out the four Klamath dams and embark on a $1 billion plan to restore salmon and shore up water supplies to farms in the upper basin. Tribes especially have worked to draw more attention to spring chinook during a process to determine whether removing the dams is in the public interest. "I think there's a lot of importance being placed on spring chinook right now," said California Department of Fish and Game biologist Mark Pisano. He said Fish and Game considers the two runs of fish to be different behaviorally, and that spring chinook would be the likely source for upper basin reintroduction of salmon if the dams are indeed removed. Supporters of the deal say that is the best way to bring spring chinook back from the brink, and some said that federal protection now is too little, too late, and won't change conditions on the ground. "The one single thing that we can do is give them a place to live," said Glen Spain with the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations. Spain said that ocean commercial fishermen can likely avoid impacts to spring chinook as they do for protected coho salmon, but that tribal fishermen may see effects. A statement from the Karuk Tribe said it shares the concern over spring chinook. It echoed its stance that the Klamath agreements to remove the dams are the best way to help their struggling stocks. "These fish have sustained Karuk People since the beginning of time," the statement read. Greacen said that the groups would oppose cutting back on tribal fishing. He responded to supporters of the Klamath agreements by saying that the deals don't address the whole Klamath basin, including the Scott, Shasta and Trinity rivers that are important to spring chinook. He added that no legislation to support the agreements has been introduced yet, that dam removal is likely years off, and that the petition is in part meant to help keep spring chinook viable in the meantime. John Driscoll can be reached at 441-0504 or jdriscoll at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Feb 1 11:16:05 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 11:16:05 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CalTrout North Coast Manager Job Flyer Message-ID: <23E265EDAE2A44EB8B831734E8855026@homeuserPC> ----- Original Message ----- From: Curtis Knight To: 'Tom Stokely' Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:06 AM Subject: Trinity listserve Tom, Can you forward the attached job description to Trinity listserve? Thanks, Curtis Curtis Knight, Conservation Director California Trout 701 S. Mt. Shasta Blvd. Mt. Shasta, CA 96067 w: (530)926-3755 c: (530)859-1872 cknight at caltrout.org www.caltrout.org Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1604 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CalTrout North Coast Manager.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 31282 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Feb 3 15:17:56 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 15:17:56 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] High Country News 1 24 2011 Message-ID: <002901cbc3f8$99f30f20$cdd92d60$@net> High Country News January 24, 2011 http://www.hcn.org/issues/43.1/californias-hupa-tribe-wars-over-fish California's Hupa tribe wars over fish by Matt Jenkins On a mid-October afternoon at the bottom of a sheer canyon on Northern California's Trinity River, a Hupa Indian named Amos Pole babies a jet boat against the rushing current. For the Hupas, this craggy chasm is a sort of psychic power spot. Dense stands of fir crowd down to the edge of the river, where, in late fall, chinook salmon idle in deep pools before continuing their exhausting journey upstream to their spawning grounds. [cid:image003.jpg at 01CBC3B2.9BDFEDD0]Leonard "Spam" Ferris and his family have been using gill nets to fish for salmon on the Trinity River for generations. But the fish numbers have dropped, and the fish come later than they did when he fished with his grandfather. By Andreas Fuhrmann/Redding Record Searchlight Today, Pole is taking water temperature readings for the tribal government, but he, like many Hupas, frequently come down to the river to fish. Some 2,500 Hupas live on the 12-square-mile Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation tucked into a fold in the Klamath Mountains. (Thanks to an orthographic quirk, the people themselves are "Hupa," while the valley is spelled "Hoopa.") The Trinity River runs through the middle of the reservation, and the river's spring and fall runs of salmon figure large in the history and identity of the people. Salmon fishing here is largely an extended form of sharing. Rights to use specific fishing holes have been handed down within families from generation to generation, but they are also often loaned to friends in exchange for a couple of fish. Fishermen preserve much of their catch by smoking it over smoldering alder fires, and often give fish away to relatives. But things are changing. Because of a series of limits and outright fishing bans, Northern California's open-ocean salmon fishermen have barely been able to fish the past three years. Paradoxically, that has opened a window of opportunity for fishermen on the Hoopa Reservation, 42 miles up the river from the coast, to sell their fish to outside buyers. Commercial fishing has surged: In 2006, the tribe had no commercial fishery to speak of; three years later, Hupa fishermen sold three-quarters of their catch to off-reservation buyers. This stretch of the river -- known simply as "the Gorge" -- was packed with nets last summer, Pole recalls. "I was dodging nets," he says. "You could actually come down here and see the fish stacked up" trying to get through. The sudden surge in commercial fishing has opened painful rifts within the tribe. There's widespread resentment that only an elite few have benefited from the sale of the tribe's fish. "The way it is, only a few families are profiting off of our resources here," says Pole. He's critical of Hupas who sell fish to outsiders when many tribe members can't get salmon themselves. "You have to feed your people first." But that's not all. Many of the Hupas who are making money from the fishery are the very tribal government employees ostensibly charged with managing the tribe's hard-won allocation of fish. According to records from the tribal police and a wholesale fish company, Mike Orcutt, the director of the tribal fisheries department, has made more money from the commercial fishery than anyone else on the reservation. Daniel Jordan, the director of the tribe's self-governance office, which advises the tribal council, has also sold fish off the reservation, as have at least three other fisheries department employees. And many Hupas charge that Orcutt, Jordan and other fisheries employees did their best to conceal the fact that there were opportunities to market the fish. "This was a clandestine commercial fishery," says Lyle Marshall, a former tribal chairman. "And if you look at the list of people who fished, they're either employees of the fisheries department or their relatives; or the (tribal) chairman's relatives; or the self-governance director's relatives. Nobody else knew about it." In the grand scheme of the millions of salmon that are caught from California to Alaska each year, the Hupas' fish are a drop in the bucket. Last year, the tribe was allotted just 6,920 fish. That may not seem like a lot, but those fish were hard-won. The Hupas' right to fish is tied to a "reserved right" implicitly created when the reservation was established in the 19th century. But in the late 1970s, tensions rose between white commercial fishermen and Indian tribes, and the Hupa and neighboring Yurok Tribe were blamed for a precipitous decline in salmon populations. In a series of incidents known as "the fish wars," the federal government deployed officers to the reservation to keep the Indians off the water. "They brought in helicopters. They brought in boats. They had M-16s and they were ripping up and down the river like it was Vietnam," remembers Marshall. But ultimately it became clear that the Indians' role in the salmon decline was minimal, and a series of court decisions affirmed the two tribes' combined right to half the "harvestable" salmon in the river. (A substantial percentage of each year's returning salmon must be allowed to return to their home streams to spawn.) In the decades since, the Hupas have gained a reputation as tough advocates for restoring salmon runs in the Trinity, whose natural flow had been destroyed by dams and water-diversion projects for Central Valley farms. Traditionally, the Hupas have primarily caught fish for "subsistence and ceremony." But for decades, on and off, the tribe has also eyed its salmon as a potential, and much-needed, source of income. By all accounts, no one has more tirelessly promoted commercial fishing than Mike Orcutt and Daniel Jordan, the tribal self-governance coordinator. "We've been sitting on a gold mine for years," says Orcutt. But, he adds, "we couldn't even get anybody interested until three years ago." Ironically, the tribe's big break came amid a disastrous meltdown for the salmon fishermen who steam out to sea from California's northern coast. Salmon populations native to California's Central Valley, farther down the coast, have plummeted dramatically. Because those fish commingle with more plentiful Trinity and Klamath River salmon in the ocean, sea-going fishermen along the North Coast inadvertently, but inevitably, catch fish from the more imperiled southern runs. To protect the Central Valley fish, the entire ocean fishery in California was shut down in 2008. That happened again in 2009. In 2010, fishing was allowed again, but the season was so abbreviated that it might as well have never happened. Because the Hoopa Valley Reservation is inland, however, fishermen there can continue to fish in the Trinity River despite the open-ocean bans. The Central Valley runs never enter the Trinity, so there's no chance of catching them. As a result, commercial fishing on the reservation has taken off. In 2008, a company called Wild Planet Foods, based on the coast nearby, began buying fish from Hupa fisherman. By the next year, Hupas sold nearly three-quarters of the fish they caught. Yet only about 27 Hupas fished commercially, and the fact that off-reservation wholesalers were interested in buying fish was not widely known. Resentment over the situation broke into the open last June, when a Hupa discovered several nets -- set by Orcutt and his brother -- where he usually set his own. That discovery soon made its way onto Facebook and sparked an emotional special session of the tribal council in September. Many tribal members' bitterness has been stoked by the fact that, as fisheries director, Orcutt already makes close to $100,000 a year. In 2009, Orcutt, his brother, Kevin, and his wife, Vivienna, sold more than 800 fish to Wild Planet, for about $32,000. Last year, the family made $19,000 selling fish to the company -- accounting for more than half the fish that Hupa tribe members sold to it. Orcutt is unapologetic about his participation in the commercial fishery. The money he made wasn't all that significant, he says: "Nobody was making a million dollars on it or anything." Yet relative wealth is measured in far smaller increments on a reservation where average per capita income is $9,908 and the unemployment rate is somewhere around 60 percent. The controversy is as much about fairness and equity as it is about fish. Even though every tribal member theoretically has an equal share in the reservation and its natural resources, that ideal is hardly borne out in practice. And nowhere is it easier to see that than in the Gorge. Because the Gorge is the first place that salmon migrating upstream cross onto the reservation, it is a kind of fisherman's mother lode. The farther upstream a Hupa's fishing spot, the fewer he typically catches, because many fish have already swum into the gantlet of successive nets downstream. But to fish the Gorge, you need a jet boat, which can navigate shallow riffles. And jet boats can cost as much as $50,000. "Ninety-nine percent is only accessible by boat, and there's only a few guys that have boats," says Jude Hostler, who himself fished commercially in 2009. Most of the Hupas who fish commercially own their own jet boats. The tribal chairman, Leonard Masten, is unsympathetic to the argument that Hupas who fish in the Gorge are shutting out those who can't. "People like myself, that choose to spend their money on a boat rather than something else, should I be criticized for that?" he says. "We have other people around here that want to bitch and complain, but they don't want to get off their ass and buy a boat." Among the Hupas, there are considerable differences of opinion about whether it's even legal for individual tribe members to sell fish off the reservation. In 1989, Hupa voters passed a referendum that allowed a "tribally operated commercial fishery," and directed the tribal council to formulate an ordinance to regulate that fishery. Yet the fishing ordinance was never amended and, other than for a one-time trial run in 1991, specific regulations have never been written for a commercial fishery. Today, the fishing ordinance posted on the tribe's website clearly says the activity is prohibited. Tom Schlosser, the tribe's attorney, says commercial fishing was legalized by the 1989 referendum -- but beyond that, it gets complicated. "Clearly, the people passed a referendum measure, and that hasn't been rescinded. So that's a matter of tribal law," he says. "Now exactly what it means," he adds, "is an internal tribal issue." By most accounts, both Orcutt and Jordan have played a crucial role in defending the tribe's interests in the often hard-ball game of water politics. They are not shy about making that point themselves. "The reason why those fish are there today is because we fought for them," says Jordan. "We have absolutely been successful in getting this tribe what it deserves." But the two men have also advanced a dubious argument that their personal fishing helps the tribe. Since 1991, there have been only three years in which Hupa fishermen caught the tribe's full allocation of salmon. Orcutt and Jordan frequently warn that the tribe might find itself in a use-it-or-lose-it situation: If Hupas can't demonstrate a need for their full allocation of fish, some may be re-allocated to other tribes. By developing a market off the reservation for Hupa fish, Orcutt says, he's helping to ensure that as much of the Hupa's share of fish is caught as possible. "We're going to take this fish and show we have a demonstrated need," he says. Masten, the tribal chairman -- whose niece, critics are quick to point out, is Orcutt's wife, Vivienna -- doesn't disagree. "We would be shooting ourselves in the foot," he says, "if we were to start prosecuting our own tribal members for something we've been fighting for here our whole lives -- fishing rights." But Schlosser says there isn't a precedent for a tribe losing its fishing allocation because it consistently falls short of its annual quota. " 'Use-it-or-lose-it' is not a concept that applies here," he says. "It's just not a relevant issue." And Lyle Marshall and other tribe members take a decidedly dimmer view. "For our tribal leaders to stand up and say, 'We did this for you, to protect your rights,' that's laughable," Marshall says. "It was 100 percent profit for them." This past summer's controversy has revealed a clash of visions about what to do with the fish that the tribe fought so hard for. "The demand for fish has created, all of a sudden, this dispute over traditional values," says Allie Hostler, the communications coordinator for the tribal fisheries department. "This is a huge issue for our people. It's a turning point." For now, the tribe is trying to figure out what to do this year. Last fall, council member Marcellene Norton proposed the establishment of a tribal fish commission to develop specific regulations for a commercial fishery. Byron Nelson, the tribe's vice chairman, is one of the leading critics of the new wave of commercial fishing. He thinks it's time to revisit the 1989 referendum in which voters OK'd commercial fishing in the first place. "The ballot said, 'a tribally controlled commercial fishery,' " he says. "What we had in mind was the old traditional fish dam" -- a log structure built to block fish from migrating upstream. "We would have everyone participate, and everyone would get fish." The fishing issue is sure to figure prominently in the tribal elections this April. Meanwhile, Danny Jordan is unrepentant about fishing for commercial sale when the runs begin coming up the Trinity this spring. "We are the die-hard people that are saying, 'Come hell or high water, we are going to protect this tribe's fishing rights,' " he says. "If it comes down to Mike Orcutt and I being the front leaders of that, I guess we're going to be doing that." (c) High Country News ### Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Feb 4 10:22:14 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 10:22:14 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Eureka Times Standard 2 3 2011 Message-ID: <002301cbc498$73fa07b0$5bee1710$@net> Fishing the North Coast:Weather or not, steelhead are still being caught Kenny Priest/For the Times-Standard Posted: 02/03/2011 01:01:51 AM PST http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site127/2011/0202/20110202_04495 5_FNC-2_3-photo_200.jpg Jenn Grover, right, of Garden Grove caught and released this beautiful 18 lb wild steelhead on a recent drift boat trip down the Eel River. Grove was fishing with guide Tony Sepulveda, pictured left, of Green Water Fishing Adventures. (Photo courtesy of Green Water Fishing Adventures.) The lack of rain continues to be the hot topic amongst North Coast steelhead anglers. Except for a brief period of rain last Saturday afternoon that dropped roughly a half-inch, the coast has been unseasonable dry. While some rivers, like the Smith and the Chetco are running out of fishable water, others like the main stem of the Eel, lower Trinity and lower Klamath are in great shape. Even with the lack of water, anglers are still catching steelhead on just about every river along the North Coast. The Smith and Chetco are still giving up a few fish to the die-hards who are grinding away on clear, low water. The Mad is having one the best years in recent memory, and the Eel and Van Duzen are both giving up decent numbers of winter steelhead. When the rain finally does fall, look out, we could be in for some world-class steelhead fishing! Weekend weather It's dry, dry and dry, according to Troy Nicolini of Eureka's National Weather Service. There's no change in the current weather pattern through at least Wednesday. Looks like another weekend of sunglasses and t-shirts. Mad River Hatchery numbers encouraging The number of steelhead returning to the Mad River Hatchery continues to be strong. Trap data for the week of January 16 to January 22 showed 505 new steelhead made their way up the ladder. That brought the season total to a whopping 1,459 returning steelhead. At this time last year, only 721 steelhead had been counted. And the run isn't over by any means. Another 422 were counted during the week of January 23-29 and 483 returned the week of January 30 through February 5. Important note: employees of the hatchery are urging anglers to use the south entrance of the hatchery when headed to and from the river. There is fear that the New Zealand Mud Snail or the Quagga Mussel could be spread to the ponds from other rivers via anglers boots or waders. If either one of those invasive species shows up in the ponds, it would severely impact the release of hatchery steelhead into the river. The Rivers: Chetco River The Chetco is running out of water reports Guide Val Early of Early Fishing Guide Service. "The fishing is spotty at best and that's only if everyone on the water stays off the fish and stays quiet. We had less than half inch of rain and the river rose an inch on Saturday night, then quickly dropped 4 inches by Sunday afternoon. We don't have any rain in the forecast until two weeks from now. It seems there are a few fish out there and with really low conditions there don't seem to be too many coming in at this time," Early said. The Smith, Eel, Mad, Van Duzen, and Mattole Rivers are regulated by low flow closures. Call the DFG's low flow closure hotline at (707) 822-3164 to determine the condition of the rivers. Smith River Crescent City guide Mike Coopman was on the Smith earlier in the week and reports the fishing is extremely tough, but there are some fish around. "It's about as low and clear as you'll see it, and you really have to work hard for your bites. Stealth and light leaders - either eight or six pound, are a must. There's not a lot of boat traffic happening now, so that makes it a little easier to sneak up on the fish," Coopman added. Eel River (main stem) Paul Grundman of Rio Dell's Grundmans Sporting Goods reports the main stem Eel is in good shape, but still just a little pushy. "From what I'm hearing, the fishing isn't red hot, but some nice adults are being caught from the forks down to Rio Dell," said Grundman. "The main stem should fish through the weekend and into next week. At that point, we'll probably need a little shot or rain." Eel River (South Fork) Darren Brown of Brown's Sporting Goods in Garberville reports the south fork still has some good color, but the Benbow area is getting pretty clear. "Right now there isn't very many boats on the south fork, most have moved down to the main so it's hard say the amount of fish that are around. If the river keeps dropping, my guess we'll have clear water down to Meyers Flat by the weekend," Brown added. Van Duzen The Van Duzen still has good color, but is starting to get a little low for boats according to Grundman. The snowmelt should keep it fishing through the weekend," Grundman added. Currently flowing at 350 cfs and is predicted to drop a little over the next couple days, but the warm weather ahead should bump up flows slightly by the end of the weekend. Mad River The fishing has slowed a bit, but the quality of fish being taken is good according to Justin Kelly of Eureka's Redwood Marine. "Water continues to flow over the spillway at Ruth Lake, which is keeping the flows up and some color in the river. Right now we're not finding many fresh hatchery fish, but there are lots of native fish in the river. The fishing pressure has thinned and anglers are spread out from the hatchery to the Blue Lake Bridge. Small clusters of roe or Spin N Glows continue to be the top baits," Kelly added. "The river is currently hovering around 7.5 feet and should fish well through the weekend and into early next week." Trinity Upper Steve Huber of Steve Huber's Guide Service has been grinding away in the Junction City area and reports some pretty tough conditions. "We're getting between zero and three fish per day and the only thing that's going to help us out is rain. The water is crystal clear right now and when the sun hits it - it's almost impossible to sneak up on the fish. Boat pressure has been light, which is expected under these conditions. As soon as we get some water, my guess is all those fish holding down in the falls area will be headed our way," Huber added. Middle According to Rick Frederick of Hawkins Bar Mini Mart the Trinity is the perfect shade of green from Big Bar all the way down past the south fork. "I'm starting to see a few more fishermen each day and I'm hearing of more fish being caught. Sounds like there are quite a few of the magnum half-pounders in the river. As the river continues to drop, I'd expect the scores will improve," Frederick added. "Roe and nightcrawlers have been the top producers." Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10046 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Feb 4 18:41:19 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 18:41:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Bureau Public Meeting CVPIA Annual Work Plans including TRRP Message-ID: <002a01cbc4de$2cb0d000$86127000$@net> http://www.usbr.gov/mp/PA/images/logos_bor_fws.png Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-11-011 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, Reclamation, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov Erica Szlosek, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 916-978-6159, erica_szlosek at fws.gov For Release On: Feb. 4, 2011 Public Meeting Scheduled On CVPIA Annual Work Plans The Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will hold a public meeting on Thursday, February 17, 2011, to present their Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) Annual Work Plans for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011. Reclamation and Service staff will make presentations on the following CVPIA Annual Work Plans: . Anadromous Fish Restoration Program - Section 3406 (b)(1) . Contra Costa Canal Pumping Plant - Section 3406 (b)(5) . Red Bluff Diversion Dam - Section 3406 (b)(10) . Anadromous Fish Screen Program - Section 3406 (b)(21) . Trinity River Restoration Program- Section 3406 (b)(1)"other" & (b)(23) . Refuge Water Supply Program - Section 3406 (d)(1), (2) and (5) The meeting will be held: Sacramento Thursday, February 17, 2011 1 p.m. - 4 p.m. Federal Building, 2800 Cottage Way Conference Room C-1001 and 1002 The CVPIA Annual Work Plans for FY 2011 are available online at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvpia/docs_reports/awp/2011/index.html. The agenda for the meeting is online at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvpia/docs_reports/index.html. For additional information, please contact Evelyn Erlandsen in Reclamation's Resources Management Division at 916-978-5214 or e-mail her at eerlandsen at usbr.gov # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov. The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages more than 150 million acres on 553 national wildlife refuges. For more information visit our website at http://www.fws.gov. If you would rather not receive future communications from Bureau of Reclamation, let us know by clicking here. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Federal Center, Alameda & Kipling Street PO Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225 United States Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 95504 bytes Desc: not available URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Mon Feb 7 16:04:59 2011 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 17:04:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Public Meeting for the Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site: Feb 15 in Junction City Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A67794AA3@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> We are planning to do channel rehabilitation work at Wheel Gulch this year! Please come to the meeting and provide your input. Hope to see you there - Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net From: lyris at swrcb18.waterboards.ca.gov [mailto:lyris at swrcb18.waterboards.ca.gov] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 3:51 PM To: Gutermuth, F. Brandt Subject: Public Meeting for the Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site Public Meeting for the Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site 6:00 pm February 15, 2011 in Junction City The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), the Bureau of Reclamation (federal lead agency), the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board - state lead agency), and the Trinity County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD - state cooperating agency), invite you to attend a meeting to learn about the planned Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Project and to provide your input. The meeting will be held starting at 6 pm on February 15 at the North Fork Grange Hall, on Dutch Creek Road in Junction City. Project information will be presented and comments on the scope of project will be accepted. [cid:image003.png at 01CBC6E0.C083ACE0] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 380134 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRRP_WheelGMtg.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 32879 bytes Desc: TRRP_WheelGMtg.pdf URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Mon Feb 7 16:47:34 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 16:47:34 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Draft EA/Fonsi Conveyance of Groundwater in Delta-Mendota Canal Message-ID: <005e01cbc729$c7179870$5546c950$@net> Reclamation News Release Header Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-11-013 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release on: February 7, 2011 Reclamation Releases Environmental Documents on Exchange Agreements, Warren Act Contracts for Conveyance of Groundwater in Delta-Mendota Canal The Bureau of Reclamation has released for public review a Draft Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for execution of Exchange Agreements and/or Warren Act Contracts for conveyance of groundwater in the Delta-Mendota Canal. The proposed actions would include issuance of two-year Exchange Agreements and/or two-year Warren Act contracts to requesting contractors within the Central Valley Project's Delta Division and San Luis Unit located in San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced and Fresno counties. The groundwater would be pumped into the Delta-Mendota Canal. Groundwater would either be delivered to the participating Delta Division contractors off the Delta-Mendota Canal, stored in San Luis Reservoir, or delivered to participating San Luis Unit contractors along the San Luis Canal via an exchange with Reclamation. The contract term would be March 1, 2011 through February 29, 2012, for pumping and conveyance, and from March 1, 2012, through February 28, 2013, for conveyance only. Contractors would not be able to pump in any additional groundwater into the Delta-Mendota Canal during the second year of the contract term. Each participating contractor would be allowed to pump up to the amount analyzed in the Draft Environmental Assessment, not to exceed 10,000 acre-feet of non-project water per contractor, with a total cap of 50,000 acre-feet for all districts combined. The non-project water would be groundwater pumped from wells that meet Reclamation's requirements for Delta-Mendota Canal water quality and the 2011 Delta-Mendota Canal Pump-in Program Water Quality Monitoring Plan. The Draft Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact (Draft EA/FONSI) were prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and are available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=7236. If you encounter problems accessing the documents online, please call 916-978-5100 or e-mail mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov. Written comments must be received by close of business February 21, 2011 and should be sent to Chuck Siek, Bureau of Reclamation, South-Central California Area Office, 1243 N Street, Fresno, CA 93721. Comments may also be faxed to Mr. Siek at 559-487-5397 or e-mailed to csiek at usbr.gov. For additional information or to request a copy of the Draft EA/FONSI, please contact Mr. Siek at 559-487-5138, TTY 800-735-2929. Copies of the documents may also be viewed at Reclamation's Fresno office at the above address. # # # Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 6959 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Tue Feb 8 17:40:20 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 17:40:20 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Hatchery trapping summary through Feb.9 Message-ID: <00ce01cbc7fa$51aec230$f50c4690$@net> Attached is the latest info on trapping totals for the 2010-11 season. Steelhead continue to enter the hatchery, although it is shaping up to be a slow year compared to the recent past. Wade Sinnen Associate Biologist Trinity River Project CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary10.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 89600 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Thu Feb 10 10:09:46 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 10:09:46 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] U.S. EPA Launches Investigation into Toxins and Stressors Impacting Fish in the Bay Delta Message-ID: <4D5429EA.8030502@tcrcd.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Water News Release (Region 9): U.S. EPA Launches Investigation into Toxins and Stressors Impacting Fish in the Bay Delta Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 10:06:33 -0600 (CST) From: U.S. EPA To: mdowdle at tcrcd.net *FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:* February 10, 2011 Media Contacts: See below *U.S. EPA Launches Investigation into Toxins and Stressors Impacting Fish in the Bay Delta* SAN FRANCISCO --The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will today take action on an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) seeking public input on the effectiveness of current water quality programs influencing the health of the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary.The ANPR identifies pivotal water quality issues affecting Bay Delta fisheries, describes regulatory measures currently underway, and initiates an information-gathering process on how the EPA and the State of California can achieve water quality and aquatic resource protection goals in one of the West Coast's most ecologically diverse and important aquatic habitats. The Bay Delta is the hub of California's water distribution system, providing drinking water to 25 million people, sustaining irrigation for 4 million acres of farmland, and supporting 750 different species of plants, fish, and wildlife, several of which are endangered or threatened.The water quality of the Bay Delta Estuary and many of its tributaries is impaired, the estuarine habitat is shrinking and many fish populations are at all-time lows. "The Bay Delta is a major source of our tap water and the water used to grow our food," said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA's Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. "EPA is committed to tackling the pollution degrading the Delta, which is threatened by contaminants from sewage, pesticides, and a host of other chemicals." No single factor is responsible for the decline of the Bay Delta's health. The present condition of the estuary reflects the cumulative and interactive effects of multiple factors, including water pollution, invasive species, water diversion and habitat degradation.Impacts associated with these stressors include toxicity to fish, invertebrates and their food sources, developmental deformities, and reproductive problems. This ANPR is part of a comprehensive set of commitments made by the Obama Administration to address California water issues under the Interim Federal Action Plan released in December 2009.Through this plan, the Administration has promoted water conservation and efficiency improvements throughout California, dedicated more than $40 million to drought relief projects, and made historic investments in modernizing California's water infrastructure. "Communities rely on their water resources to supply clean water, sustain their environment, and support vital economic activities," said Nancy Sutley, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality."Identifying the water quality challenges in the Bay Delta is key to addressing the delta's complex and long-standing water problems and ensuring healthy communities and economies in California." In its ANPR, EPA notes that it will be coordinating its review of water quality issues with the on-going development of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, which currently is being developed through a collaboration of federal, state and local agencies, environmental organizations, and other interested parties. Deputy Secretary of the Interior, David J. Hayes, who has been helping to lead the BDCP effort for the federal agencies, welcomed EPA's action, noting that "EPA's attention to a variety of water quality stressors and the role they play is an important complement to the science-based analysis that is going into the Bay Delta Conservation Plan effort." He continued:"The Administration is committed to working together across our agencies to use the best science to meet the twin goals that California has adopted for the Bay Delta in its comprehensive new water legislation:a more reliable water supply and a restored and enhanced ecosystem -- including improved water quality." In addition to protecting aquatic species' habitat, the federal Clean Water Act charges EPA with protecting water quality for a variety of uses that are not addressed in this ANPR, including water for drinking and agriculture.Water quality standards are established under the Clean Water Act to protect public health, welfare, and the protection and propagation of fish, shell fish, and wildlife. The ANPR identifies specific issues for which the EPA has regulatory responsibility and solicits comment on topics, such as potential site-specific water quality standards and site-specific changes to pesticide regulation.Summaries describing environmental stressors and the regulatory framework necessary to address them are also included in the ANPR. California's State and Regional Water Boards have the lead role under the federal Clean Water Act to protect water quality; they are actively engaged in multiple efforts, including establishing numeric water quality criteria and developing and implementing watershed improvement plans.The recovery of the Bay Delta reflects national efforts to ensure higher water quality, protect public health, and support essential fish, shell fish, and wildlife populations.The EPA, in collaboration with the State Water Resource Control Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, seeks to protect the biological, physical, and chemical integrity of the Bay Delta and its aquatic resources.Public input and scientific findings obtained from the ANPR will be reviewed and used to develop a strategic proposal for future EPA efforts toward protecting the Bay Delta and other important waterways. The ANPR solicits public input on how EPA and the State of California can achieve water quality and aquatic resource protection goals in the Bay Delta Estuary and how to best use Clean Water Act programs to improve Delta water quality. No new rules are proposed in the ANPR and the ANPR has no regulatory effect. The ANPR will be published to the Federal Register within one week.EPA encourages interested parties to read the ANPR and provide additional information and suggestions for actions to improve Bay Delta Estuary water quality and aquatic resource protection. Comments can be submitted electronically at the Federal Rulemaking Portal (www.regulations.gov) identified by docket EPA-R09-OW-210-0976 or in hardcopy addressed to Erin Foresman, US Environmental Protection Agency, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. For more information, please visit:http://www.epa.gov/region9/water/watershed/sfbay-delta or http://www.epa.gov/region9/water/watershed/sfbay-delta/anpr.html *MEDIA CONTACTS:* Mary Simms, Press Officer, U.S. EPA, (415) 947-4270, simms.mary at epa.gov Yoshiko Hill, Public Affairs Intern, U.S. EPA, (415) 947-4308, hill.yoshiko at epa.gov ### Note: If a link above doesn't work, please copy and paste the URL into a browser. View all Region 9 News Releases ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EPA Seal You can view or update your subscriptions or e-mail address at any time on your Subscriber Preferences Page . All you will need is your e-mail address. If you have any questions or problems e-mail support at govdelivery.com for assistance. This service is provided to you at no charge by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . Visit Us on Facebook Visit Us on Twitter Visit Us on YouTube Visit Us on flickr Sent by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ? 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW ? Washington DC 20460 ? 202-564-4355 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Thu Feb 10 10:09:46 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 10:09:46 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] U.S. EPA Launches Investigation into Toxins and Stressors Impacting Fish in the Bay Delta Message-ID: <4D5429EA.8030502@tcrcd.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Water News Release (Region 9): U.S. EPA Launches Investigation into Toxins and Stressors Impacting Fish in the Bay Delta Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 10:06:33 -0600 (CST) From: U.S. EPA To: mdowdle at tcrcd.net *FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:* February 10, 2011 Media Contacts: See below *U.S. EPA Launches Investigation into Toxins and Stressors Impacting Fish in the Bay Delta* SAN FRANCISCO --The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will today take action on an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) seeking public input on the effectiveness of current water quality programs influencing the health of the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary.The ANPR identifies pivotal water quality issues affecting Bay Delta fisheries, describes regulatory measures currently underway, and initiates an information-gathering process on how the EPA and the State of California can achieve water quality and aquatic resource protection goals in one of the West Coast's most ecologically diverse and important aquatic habitats. The Bay Delta is the hub of California's water distribution system, providing drinking water to 25 million people, sustaining irrigation for 4 million acres of farmland, and supporting 750 different species of plants, fish, and wildlife, several of which are endangered or threatened.The water quality of the Bay Delta Estuary and many of its tributaries is impaired, the estuarine habitat is shrinking and many fish populations are at all-time lows. "The Bay Delta is a major source of our tap water and the water used to grow our food," said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA's Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest. "EPA is committed to tackling the pollution degrading the Delta, which is threatened by contaminants from sewage, pesticides, and a host of other chemicals." No single factor is responsible for the decline of the Bay Delta's health. The present condition of the estuary reflects the cumulative and interactive effects of multiple factors, including water pollution, invasive species, water diversion and habitat degradation.Impacts associated with these stressors include toxicity to fish, invertebrates and their food sources, developmental deformities, and reproductive problems. This ANPR is part of a comprehensive set of commitments made by the Obama Administration to address California water issues under the Interim Federal Action Plan released in December 2009.Through this plan, the Administration has promoted water conservation and efficiency improvements throughout California, dedicated more than $40 million to drought relief projects, and made historic investments in modernizing California's water infrastructure. "Communities rely on their water resources to supply clean water, sustain their environment, and support vital economic activities," said Nancy Sutley, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality."Identifying the water quality challenges in the Bay Delta is key to addressing the delta's complex and long-standing water problems and ensuring healthy communities and economies in California." In its ANPR, EPA notes that it will be coordinating its review of water quality issues with the on-going development of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, which currently is being developed through a collaboration of federal, state and local agencies, environmental organizations, and other interested parties. Deputy Secretary of the Interior, David J. Hayes, who has been helping to lead the BDCP effort for the federal agencies, welcomed EPA's action, noting that "EPA's attention to a variety of water quality stressors and the role they play is an important complement to the science-based analysis that is going into the Bay Delta Conservation Plan effort." He continued:"The Administration is committed to working together across our agencies to use the best science to meet the twin goals that California has adopted for the Bay Delta in its comprehensive new water legislation:a more reliable water supply and a restored and enhanced ecosystem -- including improved water quality." In addition to protecting aquatic species' habitat, the federal Clean Water Act charges EPA with protecting water quality for a variety of uses that are not addressed in this ANPR, including water for drinking and agriculture.Water quality standards are established under the Clean Water Act to protect public health, welfare, and the protection and propagation of fish, shell fish, and wildlife. The ANPR identifies specific issues for which the EPA has regulatory responsibility and solicits comment on topics, such as potential site-specific water quality standards and site-specific changes to pesticide regulation.Summaries describing environmental stressors and the regulatory framework necessary to address them are also included in the ANPR. California's State and Regional Water Boards have the lead role under the federal Clean Water Act to protect water quality; they are actively engaged in multiple efforts, including establishing numeric water quality criteria and developing and implementing watershed improvement plans.The recovery of the Bay Delta reflects national efforts to ensure higher water quality, protect public health, and support essential fish, shell fish, and wildlife populations.The EPA, in collaboration with the State Water Resource Control Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, seeks to protect the biological, physical, and chemical integrity of the Bay Delta and its aquatic resources.Public input and scientific findings obtained from the ANPR will be reviewed and used to develop a strategic proposal for future EPA efforts toward protecting the Bay Delta and other important waterways. The ANPR solicits public input on how EPA and the State of California can achieve water quality and aquatic resource protection goals in the Bay Delta Estuary and how to best use Clean Water Act programs to improve Delta water quality. No new rules are proposed in the ANPR and the ANPR has no regulatory effect. The ANPR will be published to the Federal Register within one week.EPA encourages interested parties to read the ANPR and provide additional information and suggestions for actions to improve Bay Delta Estuary water quality and aquatic resource protection. Comments can be submitted electronically at the Federal Rulemaking Portal (www.regulations.gov) identified by docket EPA-R09-OW-210-0976 or in hardcopy addressed to Erin Foresman, US Environmental Protection Agency, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. For more information, please visit:http://www.epa.gov/region9/water/watershed/sfbay-delta or http://www.epa.gov/region9/water/watershed/sfbay-delta/anpr.html *MEDIA CONTACTS:* Mary Simms, Press Officer, U.S. EPA, (415) 947-4270, simms.mary at epa.gov Yoshiko Hill, Public Affairs Intern, U.S. EPA, (415) 947-4308, hill.yoshiko at epa.gov ### Note: If a link above doesn't work, please copy and paste the URL into a browser. View all Region 9 News Releases ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EPA Seal You can view or update your subscriptions or e-mail address at any time on your Subscriber Preferences Page . All you will need is your e-mail address. If you have any questions or problems e-mail support at govdelivery.com for assistance. This service is provided to you at no charge by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . Visit Us on Facebook Visit Us on Twitter Visit Us on YouTube Visit Us on flickr Sent by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ? 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW ? Washington DC 20460 ? 202-564-4355 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Feb 10 16:34:46 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:34:46 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Public Meeting Trinity River Wheel Gulch Channel Rehabilitation Project Message-ID: <007501cbc983$7c22b820$74682860$@net> Reclamation News Release Header Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-11-017 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: February 10, 2011 Public Meeting Scheduled on the Trinity River Wheel Gulch Channel Rehabilitation Project The Bureau of Reclamation, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board) and the Trinity County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD) will host a public meeting to present information and receive comments on the Wheel Gulch Channel Rehabilitation Project (Project). The Project is located on the mainstem Trinity River approximately 3 miles downstream of Junction City, California. The Project will work to increase salmon and steelhead habitat downstream of Lewiston Dam, as described in the December 19, 2000, Record of Decision for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Project is planned to enhance aquatic habitat quality and complexity by building slow water refuge habitats, placing structures (e.g., large woody debris), and introducing gravel into the river's floodplain. The meeting is scheduled for: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 6-8 p.m. North Fork Grange Hall Dutch Creek Road, Junction City, California An Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) for the "Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site: Trinity River Mile 75.8 to 76.4," which meets National Environmental Policy Act and California Environmental Quality Act requirements, will be available for a 30-day public review starting approximately February 14, 2011. The EA/IS will contain project specific information that was unavailable when the Regional Water Board finalized the Master Environmental Impact Report (Master EIR) for Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation and Sediment Management at Phase 1 and Phase 2 sites, which programmatically analyzes expected environmental impacts of Trinity River channel restoration activities. The EA/IS, as well as the Master EIR, will be available on the Trinity River Restoration Program website www.trrp.net by February 14, 2011. If you encounter problems accessing the documents online, please call 916-978-5100 or e-mail mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov. For additional information or to receive a copy of the EA/IS, please contact Brandt Gutermuth, Bureau of Reclamation, at 530-623-1800. Comments should be sent to Mr. Gutermuth, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093 or e-mail bgutermuth at usbr.gov. ### Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 6959 bytes Desc: not available URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Fri Feb 11 08:38:37 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:38:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Delta water chief confident peripheral canal will be built Message-ID: Delta water chief confident peripheral canal will be built http://www.chicoer.com/news/ci_17359962 By MIKE TAUGHER - Contra Costa Times Posted: 02/11/2011 12:20:38 AM PST SACRAMENTO ? The Brown administration's top official on Delta matters said this week he is confident a new aqueduct can be built to divert water from the Delta for water users in Southern California. In his first interview since joining the new administration, Jerry Meral said events and information developed since he backed the Peripheral Canal as part of Gov. Jerry Brown's first administration have only strengthened the case for it. And estimates developed at the end of the Schwarzenegger administration about the amount of water that could be taken from the Delta will probably prove to be in the right ballpark, he said. He cautioned that he was expressing personal convictions and that final decisions would be made only after formal reviews. "I don't want to prejudge this," Meral said, "but something like a facility roughly of the size in the earlier documents will be proposed, will be permitted and be built." Meral, who has a doctorate in zoology, has spent much of his career working for environmental groups. He was also deputy director of the state Department of Water Resources from 1975 to 1983, when he supported the controversial Peripheral Canal that would have skirted the Delta to move Sacramento River water to the south. Voters statewide killed that plan in 1982, with strong opposition north of the Delta. Now deputy secretary for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, Meral has the distinction of being both a prominent environmentalist and a strong supporter of an aqueduct to reduce reliance on south Delta pumps. Many environmentalists outright oppose the aqueduct while others who are open to the idea are much more qualified in their support. An aqueduct is now the centerpiece for the conservation plan. In recent months, tunnels under the Delta appear to have overtaken a canal as the preferred choice. By using the aqueduct instead of south Delta pumps, and by restoring Delta wetlands, supporters hope the plan can satisfy endangered species laws and end water supply disruptions caused by environmental problems in the Delta. Much of the project costs, more than $12 billion, would be paid for by Southern California, San Joaquin Valley farm districts and others. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Mon Feb 14 13:27:00 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 13:27:00 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] HR 1 Disaster Message-ID: <00e501cbcc8d$ebe21b30$c3a65190$@net> Choose the video format you prefer. YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46XAiqDdv6o&hd=1 Vimeo: http://www.vimeo.com/19903888 Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Mon Feb 14 18:18:45 2011 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 19:18:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] REMINDER: Public Meeting for the Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site: Feb 15 in Junction City In-Reply-To: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A67794AA3@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> References: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A67794AA3@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A67AC9625@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Trinity River Enthusiasts - Just a reminder - Public Meeting for the Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site 6:00 pm February 15, 2011 in Junction City - (the only planned Channel Rehab work this year) The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), the Bureau of Reclamation (federal lead agency), the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board - state lead agency), and the Trinity County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD - state cooperating agency), invite you to attend a meeting to learn about the planned Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Project and to provide your input. The meeting will be held starting at 6 pm on February 15 at the North Fork Grange Hall, on Dutch Creek Road in Junction City. Project information will be presented and comments on the scope of project will be accepted. Project information is available in the Wheel Gulch Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) during a 30 day comment which ends March 17. The EA/IS is available at: http://www.trrp.net/implementation/WheelGulchEA.htm or http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=7238 or a hard copy is available to review at the Trinity Library, the TRRP office or the Trinity County RCD offices in Weaverville. Otherwise, give me a call and we'll get you a copy. We are planning to do channel rehabilitation work at only Wheel Gulch this year! In addition, we plan to add coarse sediment (gravel) during high flows at Lowden Ranch and at the weir hole (in Lewiston). This year we will be emphasizing monitoring and reporting at our recent rehab sites, and putting together our plans (based on analysis of what is working and what is not) for future implementation. Please come to the meeting and provide your input. Hope to see you there - Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net [cid:image001.png at 01CBCC6F.F6A00730] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 380134 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Feb 15 10:11:29 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 10:11:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Atmospheric observatory slated for Humboldt Message-ID: <4D5AC1D1.6050006@tcrcd.net> *Atmospheric observatory coming to Humboldt; equipment in **Eureka**area will help meteorologists better gauge big winter storms* John Driscoll/The Times-Standard Posted: 02/15/2011 01:30:23 AM PST The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration plans to build a high-tech meteorological observatory in the Eureka area that should help forecasters better understand the source of California's largest storms. The observatory would be one of four on the California coast that will be part of a study of so-called atmospheric rivers, which transport massive amounts of water across the Pacific Ocean before dumping it on land. The agency is looking to improve forecasts for storms that might lead to flooding, landslides and severe winds. The Eureka-area observatory could begin to be built about a year from now, said NOAA research meteorologist Allen White. The unmanned equipment will include Doppler wind-profiling radar, GPS and a meteorological tower, all of which allow meteorologists to determine the speed of winds in an atmospheric river and how much water vapor the winds are transporting. NOAA plans to place other observatories in the Bodega Bay, Big Sur and Santa Barbara areas. Atmospheric rivers are ribbons of air between 300 and 500 km wide -- about 186 to 310 miles -- that form off cyclones or draw moisture from over the ocean. "In essence, they are rivers in the sky," said Marty Ralph, chief of the Water Cycle Branch in NOAA's Physical Science Division. Atmospheric rivers are responsible for carrying about 90 percent of the water vapor in the Northern Hemisphere, Ralph said. A series of them brought 11 to 25 inches of rain to areas of California in mid-December and dumped huge amounts of snow in the Sierra Nevada at the time. Scientists can see these rivers from space using satellites, but those instruments are unable to measure wind speed or water vapor content. The land-based observatories are able to do both, giving meteorologists a way to check computer forecast models regarding atmospheric rivers. Ralph said that a better understanding of wind speed and water vapor content in the atmospheric rivers will help give a better picture of what to expect when the rivers flow over land. Ralph said that both the speed of the wind and the amount of moisture in a river dictate how much precipitation will fall when the river hits a mountain range. When the air hits the mountains, it rises and cools, condensing the water vapor and causing rainfall. The faster the wind, the more rain, and the more moisture, the more rain. NOAA also plans to use unmanned aircraft that can fly for 24 hours or more and travel at very high and low altitudes. The aircraft will have on board advanced water vapor sensors and dropsondes -- devices that will measure temperature, wind and other factors when they are dropped. The state Department of Water Resources will use the information gleaned from the overall project to improve flood response and emergency preparedness. White said that NOAA will be scouting locally for an area to place the atmospheric rivers observatory -- which is only about 20 feet by 20 feet -- sometime within the next six months. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Doc1.doc Type: application/msword Size: 36864 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Feb 15 10:11:29 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 10:11:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Atmospheric observatory slated for Humboldt Message-ID: <4D5AC1D1.6050006@tcrcd.net> *Atmospheric observatory coming to Humboldt; equipment in **Eureka**area will help meteorologists better gauge big winter storms* John Driscoll/The Times-Standard Posted: 02/15/2011 01:30:23 AM PST The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration plans to build a high-tech meteorological observatory in the Eureka area that should help forecasters better understand the source of California's largest storms. The observatory would be one of four on the California coast that will be part of a study of so-called atmospheric rivers, which transport massive amounts of water across the Pacific Ocean before dumping it on land. The agency is looking to improve forecasts for storms that might lead to flooding, landslides and severe winds. The Eureka-area observatory could begin to be built about a year from now, said NOAA research meteorologist Allen White. The unmanned equipment will include Doppler wind-profiling radar, GPS and a meteorological tower, all of which allow meteorologists to determine the speed of winds in an atmospheric river and how much water vapor the winds are transporting. NOAA plans to place other observatories in the Bodega Bay, Big Sur and Santa Barbara areas. Atmospheric rivers are ribbons of air between 300 and 500 km wide -- about 186 to 310 miles -- that form off cyclones or draw moisture from over the ocean. "In essence, they are rivers in the sky," said Marty Ralph, chief of the Water Cycle Branch in NOAA's Physical Science Division. Atmospheric rivers are responsible for carrying about 90 percent of the water vapor in the Northern Hemisphere, Ralph said. A series of them brought 11 to 25 inches of rain to areas of California in mid-December and dumped huge amounts of snow in the Sierra Nevada at the time. Scientists can see these rivers from space using satellites, but those instruments are unable to measure wind speed or water vapor content. The land-based observatories are able to do both, giving meteorologists a way to check computer forecast models regarding atmospheric rivers. Ralph said that a better understanding of wind speed and water vapor content in the atmospheric rivers will help give a better picture of what to expect when the rivers flow over land. Ralph said that both the speed of the wind and the amount of moisture in a river dictate how much precipitation will fall when the river hits a mountain range. When the air hits the mountains, it rises and cools, condensing the water vapor and causing rainfall. The faster the wind, the more rain, and the more moisture, the more rain. NOAA also plans to use unmanned aircraft that can fly for 24 hours or more and travel at very high and low altitudes. The aircraft will have on board advanced water vapor sensors and dropsondes -- devices that will measure temperature, wind and other factors when they are dropped. The state Department of Water Resources will use the information gleaned from the overall project to improve flood response and emergency preparedness. White said that NOAA will be scouting locally for an area to place the atmospheric rivers observatory -- which is only about 20 feet by 20 feet -- sometime within the next six months. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Doc1.doc Type: application/msword Size: 36864 bytes Desc: not available URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Tue Feb 15 12:01:02 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 12:01:02 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] California Budget Crisis Puts State Parks On Chopping Block Message-ID: California Budget Crisis Puts State Parks On Chopping Block By KRCR News Channel 7 POSTED: 3:29 am PST February 14, 2011 http://www.krcrtv.com/news/26856158/detail.html UPDATED: 3:38 am PST February 14, 2011 *WEAVERVILLE, Calif. -- *California's budget crisis has some state parks on the chopping block, including the Joss House in Weaverville.State officials plan to meet this week to determine which state parks could be shut down, to help fill California's multi-billion dollar budget hole.Officials say revenue won't be the only determing factor in deciding which parks to close. Administrators say it costs about $165,000 to operate the park every year, and Joss House only brings in about 10% of that. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Wed Feb 16 11:51:27 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:51:27 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] E& E 2 15 2011 Message-ID: <019401cbce12$e8153bf0$b83fb3d0$@net> Feinstein pressed to halt CR provision on Calif. delta (02/15/2011) Colin Sullivan, E&E reporter California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) has asked his state's senior U.S. senator to kill language in the House version of the continuing resolution that would reverse some protections for endangered fish in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to boost water exports from the estuary. Writing on behalf of Brown, California Secretary for Natural Resources John Laird over the weekend urged Democrat Dianne Feinstein to intervene to remove a provision that was inserted by Republicans that would defund some pumping limits in the delta put in place to protect salmon and delta smelt. Feinstein, a top appropriator, is in an ideal position to remove the language to let parties involved in litigation over the delta smelt and associated biological opinions come to "a reasonable settlement" on their own, Laird wrote in a letter. "The language in the House of Representatives proposal would make further negotiations impossible," Laird said. "Worse yet, the resolution as currently written, would not resolve the ongoing litigation nor move us toward the twin goals of water supply reliability and ecosystem health." The CR would stop regulations related to the bi-ops that reverses the flow of water in the southern delta, where channels carry water to farms and water districts in the San Joaquin Valley and farther south. The CR would also stop the practice of cutting salinity during the fall and halt spring pumping curbs in the San Joaquin River to aid steelhead. The flare-up comes as arguments took place today in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco over a federal judge's ruling on the smelt. In December, U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger said a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service bi-op on the smelt under the Endangered Species Act was sloppy and ordered the agency to reconsider its science (Greenwire , Dec. 15, 2010). A decision from the 9th Circuit is not expected for about six months, according to attorneys involved in the case. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Wed Feb 16 16:19:13 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:19:13 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: 2010 Klamath Basin/Trinity fall Chinook run (megatable) Message-ID: <003c01cbce38$4f5c98b0$ee15ca10$@net> Attached is the subject table. 2010 data is subject to change, all other years data are final. Wade Sinnen Associate Biologist Trinity River Project CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2010MEGTBL_prelim_Feb_3_11.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 117514 bytes Desc: not available URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Thu Feb 17 11:26:31 2011 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 12:26:31 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site Environmental document available for public review thorough March 17, 2011 Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A67BC1CD3@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Dear Agency Reviewers and Interested Parties- The Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site: Trinity River Mile 75.8 to 76.4 Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) is available for review. The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) of the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Bureau of Land Management (federal co-lead agencies), the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board - state lead agency), and the Trinity County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD - state cooperating agency), are working together to inform the public about this proposed project. The Project EA/IS, which meets California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements, is available for public review and comment through March 17, 2011. In an effort to conserve resources, we have chosen to print few of these in hard copy. The Wheel Gulch EA/IS (and the Master Environmental Impact Report - Programmatic environmental review document for TRRP proposed channel rehabilitation and sediment management actions), which explains and analyzes environmental impacts of the project, is available on the TRRP website: http://www.trrp.net/implementation/WheelGulchEA.htm or on Reclamation's Mid-Pacific website at: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_base.cfm?location=ncao . The EA/IS may be reviewed in hard copy in Weaverville at: 1) the Trinity County library at 211 Main Street, 2) the TRRP office at 1313 S Main Street (by Top's Grocery), or 3) the TCRCD at Horseshoe square (on HWY 3). In Redding the EA/IS may be reviewed at the Bureau of Land Management office at 355 Hemsted Lane. The Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Project is located on the mainstem Trinity River approximately 3 miles downstream of Junction City. The project will work to increase salmon and steelhead habitat downstream of Lewiston Dam, as described in the December 19, 2000, Record of Decision for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Environmental Impact Statement. The Project is planned to enhance aquatic habitat quality and complexity via construction of slow water refuge habitats, placement of structures (e.g., large woody debris), and introduction of gravel into the river's floodplain. In 2009, the Regional Water Board acted as lead agency for a Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) and site specific Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Report (EA/EIR) (State Clearinghouse number 2008032110) for channel rehabilitation and sediment management activities for the remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 sites in order to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Regional Water Board certified the environmental documents on August 25, 2009 (WDID No. 1A09062WNTR). Under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15177, after a Master EIR has been prepared and certified, subsequent projects which the lead agency determines as being within the scope of the Master EIR will be subject to only limited environmental review. The preparation of a new environmental document and new written findings will not be required if, based on a review of the initial study (IS) prepared for the subsequent project (e.g., the Wheel Gulch EA/IS), the lead agency determines, on the basis of written findings, that no additional significant environmental effect will result from the proposal, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives may be required, and that the project is within the scope of the Master EIR. The Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site EA/IS contains project specific information required to apply for enrollment under the General Permit R1-2010-0028 for Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation activities which the Regional Water Board will consider in making its determination and approval decision. If you would like to receive a copy of the EA/IS on a cd, please contact Mr. Alex Cousins, TCRCD, at 623-6004, or Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, Bureau of Reclamation, at 623-1806. A limited number of hard copies are also available. Comments may be sent to: Mr. Alex Cousins, Trinity County RCD, P.O. Box 1450, Weaverville, Ca 96093 or e-mail acousins at tcrcd.net or Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093, or e-mail bgutermuth at mp.usbr.gov. Best Regards- Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Thu Feb 17 20:22:57 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 20:22:57 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Not Trinity related, but storm preparedness related Message-ID: Hi all, This link is not for anything Trinity River related. Just FYI. Don't be mad, ok? It is, however, related to the storms we are having currently in California, and presents information about preparing for disaster from the Red Cross. I just happen to be interviewed for this newscast as part of my volunteer duties as the Chico Disaster Coordinator for the Red Cross. If you're interested in seeing this interview, it can be found 4 minutes in at this link: http://www.khsltv.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoId=16172 at khsl.web.entriq.net&navCatId=146 Since I got you this far, we have a week of storms to deal with, with many of you in the mountains looking at being snowed in. Always make sure you are prepared to take care of yourself during an emergency by ensuring you have at least 72 hours of food and water, flashlights, warm clothes, blankets, hand crank radio, and other necessities until emergency personnel can assist. Be safe out there! Josh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Sat Feb 19 08:33:43 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 08:33:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Movement starts to halt Klamath study funding Message-ID: Movement starts to halt Klamath study funding http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1802976503/Movement-starts-to-halt-Klamath-study-funding *By David Smith* Daily News Posted Feb 17, 2011 @ 09:02 AM Yreka, Calif. ? The subject of a letter to Wally Herger approved by the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors Tuesday saw action Wednesday at the House level as Congressman Tom McClintock introduced a measure to reduce funding for studies on the Klamath River. The board?s letter, brought forth by County Counsel Thomas Guarino, begins, ?It has recently come to our understanding that you have requested our opinion with respect to an amendment that may be offered in Congress to eliminate any funding for the study of dam removal on the?Klamath River??under the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA). The KHSA?calls for the study of various environmental impacts and potential outcomes to determine whether or not to remove four dams along the Klamath, with many of the studies currently underway. Along with support for constraints on funding for dam removal studies, the letter states that the board would support any constraints on funding for other KHSA?activities and the companion Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. Board Chair Jim Cook stated that he believes there is a likelihood that if the studies are postponed, more studies could be introduced, something the board has requested in the past. Natural Resources Policy Specialist Ric Costales added that upon talking to McClintock?s staff, he was led to believe that the congressman feels that the KBRA, which calls for approximately $1 billion in expenditures,?is ?outpacing??the activities under the KHSA. When taken to a vote, the letter was approved 4-1, with District 2 Supervisor Ed Valenzuela voting no. Earlier in the meeting, he had expressed concern about stopping the studies, citing the need for information. McClintock has already taken action, however, introducing an amendment just after midnight Tuesday to House Resolution 1, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act. McClintock?s amendment, which was agreed to by a voice vote, would reduce funds for a sedimentation study being conducted by the United States Bureau of Reclamation and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service by $1.897 million, applying that amount instead to a deficit reduction account. HR 1?was introduced on Feb. 11 and has not yet reached the House. ? David Smith can be reached at dsmith at siskiyoudaily.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From truman at jeffnet.org Sat Feb 19 10:06:28 2011 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:06:28 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: JPR eNews for February 18, 2011 Message-ID: IN THIS ISSUE Rising Tide Technical Update & Signal Status SUPPORT JPR The spirited programs JPR creates and broadcasts each day are made possible by the generous support of our listeners. Make a contribution today! THIS WEEK'S TOP STORIES FROM NPR - More Blood In Bahrain As Troops Fire On Protesters - Runaway Wisconsin Democrats Cheered By Protesters - Libya: Opposition Groups Claim They Control Several Cities QUICK LINKS Jefferson Exchange JPR Webstreams RECENT NEWS & PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS - JPR Foundation Accepts $500K Medford Building Donation - Winter Storms Cause Multiple Outages Rising Tide California wants to plan ahead for rising sea levels, requiring the study of existing coastal conditions. In Humboldt County, environmental planner Alderon Laird works to inventory the condition of Humboldt Bay and project the likely effects of rising sea levels. Laird joins the Jefferson Exchange Tuesday, February 22 at 8:30 am. Technical Update & Signal Status Snowfall earlier this week has provoked signal problems in several locations. JPR Services to the Oregon coast are suffering static and interruptions. Service in the Roseburg area is affected, too, as is KSOR-FM, KAGI-FM, and associated translators. JPR engineers will make their third attempt to reach the King Mountain transmitter site this Saturday, which is key to fixing most of the current signal issues.. If you are experiencing a poor signal or no signal where you listen, please contact us: a.. JPR Signal Status Page b.. Report Signal Problem Page c.. 24/7 Alert System: 1-888-577-2250 Please send all inquiries and replies regarding this eNews email to: enews at jeffnet.org Jefferson Public Radio Forward email This email was sent to truman at jeffnet.org by jpr at jeffnet.org | Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe? | Privacy Policy. Jefferson Public Radio | 1250 Siskiyou Blvd | Ashland | OR | 97520 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3452 - Release Date: 02/18/11 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Feb 25 07:27:44 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 07:27:44 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] OCAP Settlement Agreement, 2.24.2011 Message-ID: <02df01cbd500$8fe2c1b0$afa84510$@net> In case you haven't seen the OCAP Settlement, a copy is attached. Also, here is NRDC's reaction to the Settlement: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dobegi/settlement_maintains_scientifi.html Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Final OCAP Settlement Agreement_2.24.2011.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 32781 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Feb 25 19:26:52 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 19:26:52 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Long Term Water Transfers South Message-ID: <001201cbd565$0a6f2360$1f4d6a20$@net> >From Planning and Conservation League: NORTHERN CALIFORNIA REJECTS LONG-TERM WATER TRANSFER AGREEMENT Just days away from a program scoping process comment deadline, northern California water irrigation districts stand firm behind their February 2nd letter, which states they will not agree to sell their water to Central Valley water contractors. The proposed U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's 10-year "Long-Term North to South Water Transfers" program, would ship up to thousands of acre-feet of water from northern California to the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority; which represents agricultural water districts in the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California. The realization of this program is contingent on the willingness of northern California sellers and that willingness has yet to be seen. A week few weeks ago, Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District, Maxwell Irrigation District, Natomas Central Mutual Water Company, Pelger Mutual Water Company, Princeton-Codora-Glenn Irrigation District, Provident Irrigation District, Reclamation District No. 108 and River Garden Farms, all rallied to formally submit a letter withdrawing their participation in the long-term water transfer program. In the letter, the districts voiced concern for the long term protection of the right to their water supplies. The letter further explain, "[the Bureau of Reclamation's] position threatens landowners within our service areas of not having enough water to irrigate crops, puts at risk endangered species and water fowl that rely upon the continued irrigation of their lands, and could ruin the regional economy." With this in mind, it begs the question: In these cash strapped times, is it necessary to spend state, federal and local money on pursuing the development of the water transfer program when a vital component is not willing to participate? The deadline to submit comments regarding the "Long-Term North to South Water Transfers" program is February 28th. You can submit comments to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation by clicking here . Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Sat Feb 26 09:31:20 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:31:20 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: 29th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference is fast approaching!!! Please spread the word! Message-ID: <002001cbd5da$fbaa4d20$f2fee760$@net> From: Heather Reese [mailto:heather at calsalmon.org] Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 3:09 PM To: heather at calsalmon.org Subject: 29th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference is fast approaching!!! Please spread the word! Hello, I am writing on behalf of Salmonid Restoration Federation to inform you that the 29th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference will be held March 23-26, 2011 in San Luis Obispo, CA. This is the premier salmon and steelhead restoration conference on th eWest Coast and features exciting all-day habitat restoration tours, educational workshops, a Plenary session with prominent fisheries scientists, legislators, and conservation advocates as well as nine concurrent sessions focusing on biological, physical, and environmental issues that affect salmon recovery. Attached (and pasted below) is a 70-word blurb that we welcome you to post in your newsletters or online event calendars. I have also pasted in a longer full page article that includes more detailed information about the Conference. SRF welcomes your participation at the conference and invites you to share this information with your co-workers, constituents and clients, or in any online calendar or newsletter. Please let us know if you would like to receive any newsletters, which include the conference agenda and registration packet, or posters. You can see the full agenda of the conference at http://www.calsalmon.org/pdf/SRF_ConfAgenda_120210_web.pdf or view a description of the workshops and field tours at: http://www.calsalmon.org/index.php/registration/wednesday-workshops-a-tours. html and http://www.calsalmon.org/index.php/registration/thursday-workshops-and-tours .html ____________________________________________________________________________ __________ 29th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference March 23-26, 2011 in San Luis Obispo, CA Salmonid Restoration Federation proudly presents the 29th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference,March 23-26, 2011 in lovely San Luis Obispo, CA. This year's conference includes two full days of workshops and field tours on fisheries restoration topics, a plenary session featuring prominent keynote speakers and concurrent sessions focusing on environmental, biological, and policy issues that affect salmonid recovery. For more detailed information, please see www.calsalmon.org or contact SRF at 707 923-7501. ____________________________________________________________________________ ___________ 29th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference March 23-26, 2011 in San Luis Obispo, CA Salmonid Restoration Federation will host the 29th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference March 23-26, 2011 in San Luis Obispo, California. The theme of the conference this year is "Restoring Salmonids - Holding the Line on Species Decline." The Plenary Session will feature Michael Pollock from the Northwest Fisheries Science Center of NOAA Fisheries, Thomas Williams from the Southwest Fisheries Science Center of NOAA Fisheries, Congresswoman Lois Capps, and Paul Jenkin from Surfrider Foundation and the Matilija Coalition. This year the conference will feature workshops on topics including Fish Passage Design & Implementation, Stormwater Pollution Runoff & Water Quality, Invasive Species Management for Salmonids, and Sustainable Water Conservation. Field Tours will include tours of the Morro Bay Watershed from Headwaters to Mouth; a San Luis Obispo and Arroyo Grande Creek Tour; a Sustainable Vineyards and Agricultural Practices Tour; an Instream Structures Tour, and a tour that focuses on reducing sediment delivery and & road-related erosion control. Concurrent sessions include: . On-the-Ground Salmonid Restoration: Obstacles and Opportunities . Barrier Identification, Design Criteria, Implementation, and Project Monitoring to Recover Steelhead . Coho Salmon Recovery Efforts . Enhancing Instream Flows: Springs, Seeps, and Groundwater Recharge for Salmonids . Salmonid Strongholds: The Key to our Future . Climate Change and Salmonids . Population Status and Trend Monitoring . The Future for California Chinook Salmon - Fisheries, Restoration, Recovery . The Role of Lagoons and Estuaries for Steelhead and Salmon Other conference events will include a film social and dinner on Thursday evening which will show the STRAW documentary http://www.asimplequestion.org/, short film clips by Thomas Dunklin http://www.thomasbdunklin.com/ and Damolition footage by Matt Stoecker. SRF will host a poster session and reception on Friday night, and a cabaret and banquet with a Wild Copper River salmon dinner and fantastic Latin dance band Sambada http://www.sambada.com/ For more information about the conference, please visit www.calsalmon.org. -- Heather Reese Project Coordinator Salmonid Restoration Federation (707) 923-7501 www.calsalmon.org heather at calsalmon.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2011 Conference PR_70wordct_011811.doc Type: application/msword Size: 122880 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Sat Feb 26 11:47:06 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 11:47:06 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] If Salmon Could Speak to Governor Brown Part 4. Message-ID: <003701cbd5ee$05949f30$10bddd90$@net> We continue our series, If Salmon Could Speak to Governor Brown, with Part 4. Embedding and sharing is encouraged. Here are the details about this second part of six and the links to watch it: If Salmon Could Speak to Governor Brown: A six-part series We continue our six-part series, with part four: Water Conservation Agriculture uses 80% of the developed water in California. Urban users account for 11%. Both agriculture and urban water users need to conserve. Price elasticity is the key to encouraging changed behaviors from all users. Watch it here: YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNd6HtoQRIY &hd=1 Vimeo: http://www.vimeo.com/19954770 Bruce Tokars www.salmonwaternow.org Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Mon Feb 28 09:35:48 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 09:35:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Public Release of Draft Subsequent EIR and Proposed Suction Dredge Regulations Message-ID: <00a201cbd76d$f2307460$d6915d20$@net> Draft Subsequent EIR and Proposed Suction Dredge Regulations Importance: High ** High Priority ** Interested Parties Today the California Department of Fish and Game released the referenced documents and has begun the formal public review. The SDEIR, Proposed Regulations, Newsletter, Press Release, and other information is available for your review at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge/ . Mark Stopher Environmental Program Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 voice 530.225.2275 fax 530.225.2391 cell 530.945.1344 Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Tue Mar 1 15:39:34 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 15:39:34 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Sac Bee 3 1 2011 Message-ID: <005301cbd869$ef99a260$cecce720$@net> State could cut permits for gold dredging in rivers and streams Share By Matt Weiser mweiser at sacbee.com Published: Tuesday, Mar. 1, 2011 - 11:40 am A new environmental study of California's suction dredge mining program could reduce the number of permits issued for that activity by more than half. The environmental impact report on the program was prepared by the California Department of Fish and Game as a result of a lawsuit against its suction dredge permitting practices. The Karuk Tribe alleged suction dredging was harming fish spawning habitat and also releasing pollutants in streambeds left behind by historic mining activity. Suction dredging involves using a powerful pump, usually driven by a generator mounted on a raft, to vacuum up streambed sediments and separate out gold and other valuble minerals. Some of the heaviest such activity occurs in Sierra, Plumas, Placer and El Dorado counties. Participation requires an annual Fish and Game permit that costs $47 for residents, $185 for nonresidents. A court ruling in 2009 required the new study of the program, and Fish and Game suspended the permitting program in the meantime. The study identifies an "environmentally superior" alternative that would limit suction dredge permits to 1,500 annually, compared to an average of 3,200 issued annually over the past 15 years. It would also limit dredge nozzle size to 4 inches, compared to the current maximum of 8 inches, and would limit dredging to 14 days a year for each permit holder. Fish and Game has scheduled five public meetings on the study this month, including one in Sacramento on March 29 at 5 p.m. at the Cal EPA Headquarters Building, 1001 I St. For information and to read the study, visit: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge/ or call (530) 225-2275. Public comments will be accepted until April 29 by writing to Mark Stopher, California Department of Fish and Game, 601 Locust St., Redding, CA 96001; or by email to dfgsuctiondredge at dfg.ca.gov. Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/03/01/3440506/state-could-cut-permits-for-gold.ht ml#ixzz1FOUy3FRl Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Mar 3 15:05:40 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 15:05:40 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Sacramento Bee 3 2 2011 Message-ID: <005a01cbd9f7$96665730$c3330590$@net> sacbee.com Study may limit permits for suction dredge mining By Matt Weiser mweiser at sacbee.com The Sacramento Bee Published: Wednesday, Mar. 2, 2011 - 12:00 am | Page 2B Last Modified: Wednesday, Mar. 2, 2011 - 9:01 am An environmental study of California's suction dredge mining program could cut the number of permits issued for that activity in half. The draft report was prepared by the California Department of Fish and Game following a lawsuit by the Karuk Tribe, which alleged suction dredging harms fish habitat and releases pollutants left by historic mining. Suction dredging involves using a powerful pump to vacuum up streambed sediment to obtain gold and other valuable minerals. Some of the heaviest activity occurs in Sierra, Plumas, Placer and El Dorado counties. Participation requires an annual Fish and Game permit that costs $47 for residents, $185 for nonresidents. A court ruling required the study, and Fish and Game suspended its permit program in the meantime. The study's "environmentally superior" alternative limits permits to 1,500 annually, compared to an average of 3,200 annually over the past 15 years. It would also limit dredge nozzle size to 4 inches, compared to the current maximum of 8 inches, and would limit dredging to 14 days a year for each permit holder. Five meetings on the study are planned this month, including one at 5 p.m. March 29 at the Cal EPA Headquarters, 1001 I St., Sacramento. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 8742 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Mar 4 10:48:48 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 10:48:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Greenspace 3 1 2011 Message-ID: <002401cbda9c$d84c3f20$88e4bd60$@net> Greenspace Environmental news from California and beyond Brown administration pushing ahead with Sacramento-San Joaquin delta plans March 3, 2011 | 4:22 pm Boat The future of a multibillion-dollar project to reroute water shipments from Northern California and salvage the battered ecosytem of the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta started looking shaky late last year. Irked that the project may not give them all the water they want, major San Joaquin Valley irrigation districts said they were walking away from the planning process. But in prepared remarks, a state water official made it clear Thursday that as far as the administration of Gov. Jerry Brown is concerned, the program is alive and vital to the millions of Californians who draw water from the delta. Jerry Meral, the Brown administration's point man in the delta wars, canceled his appearance at a Los Angeles water policy conference because illness. His speech was delivered -- with a few wry asides -- by Randy Kanouse, a Bay Area water official who is a friend of Meral's but also a vocal critic of the delta project. Meral did not endorse specifics of the plans, the latest version of which calls for extensive habitat restoration and construction of a huge tunnel system to carry Sacramento River water beneath the delta to southbound aqueducts. But he emphasized that the current system of pumping from the south delta causes "great harm to the biology of the delta, while delivering relatively poor quality water under the constant threat of water supply interruptions, from court imposed sanctions to failing levees." Meral, an environmentalist who handled water issues during Brown's first administration, said the expense of new facilities should be borne by the agencies supplied by the delta. "By absorbing the full cost of new water facilities, water users will receive price signals about the true cost of water, and will manage it accordingly," he said. Meral insisted that delta management should be guided by science "unfiltered by political considerations." And he acknowledged complaints that various organizations have been excluded from key decisions, suggesting the formation of working groups open to a broad array of interests that would hammer out contentious aspects of the delta proposal. "More public involvement is necessary," Meral said. "In fact, it is critical for the results to be accepted by all." Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 35981 bytes Desc: not available URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Fri Mar 4 15:29:18 2011 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:29:18 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Restoration Program 2009 Annual Report is available Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A69846FD5@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Dear Trinity River Enthusiasts, The Trinity River Restoration Program's 2009 Annual Report is available on our website www.trrp.net The report is located at http://www.iims.trrp.net/Library/Details.aspx?document=1016 Regards- Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Mon Mar 7 13:10:19 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 13:10:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times 3 7 2011 Message-ID: <005301cbdd0c$14181620$3c484260$@net> House GOP budget bill aims to slash environmental regulation The plan to cut $60 billion from the federal budget targets environmental programs so widely it appears to be as much an ideological gambit as a budgetary one. 'The sheer scope of it is overwhelming,' a UCLA environmental law expert says. Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta Water birds fly over the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Budget cuts would kill appropriations for a salmon restoration program on the San Joaquin River as well as funding for Endangered Species Act fish protections that have reduced water deliveries from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. (Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times / October 11, 2010) By Bettina Boxall, Los Angeles Times March 7, 2011 The House spending bill passed last month wouldn't just chop $60 billion from the federal budget - it seeks to cut a broad swath through environmental regulation. >From fish protections in California to water pollution limits in Florida and regulation of greenhouse gas emissions nationwide, environmental programs were targets of the Republican budget resolution, which appears to have been as much about setting a political agenda as about deficit reduction. Democrats have promised to block the environmental and other cuts in the Senate, where they hold a slim majority, and President Obama has raised the threat of a veto, making it unlikely that many of the hits in the proposal will survive. Lawmakers last week passed a stopgap measure to keep the government operating while they hash out a compromise. But few expect the recently elected and highly motivated GOP majority in the House to give up. "I think they're going to try and use every tactic in the book," said Nick Loris, a research associate with the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. "This is largely what they came into office saying they were going to do." The continuing resolution adopted by the House two weeks ago swings a much bigger ax than similar proposals that helped stall a spending measure, resulting in a government shutdown in 1995. "I've never seen anything remotely like this. The sheer scope of it is overwhelming," said Sean Hecht, executive director of the UCLA Environmental Law Center. The much-amended proposal, which would fund the federal government for the fiscal year ending in September, slashes spending on dozens of environmental initiatives on the state and national level. In California, the resolution would kill appropriations for a salmon restoration program on the San Joaquin River as well as funding for Endangered Species Act fish protections that have reduced water deliveries from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The measure also withdraws funding for a study on the removal of hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River and chops $15 million from the Presidio Trust in San Francisco. The proposal slices the Environmental Protection Agency budget by 30% - the largest cut to any agency. It bars the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions and from implementing new water pollution limits in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and in Florida. The bill stops the agency from enforcing new limits on toxic emissions, such as mercury, from cement plants and from updating air pollution standards on dust and other coarse particulate matter that exacerbate asthma and lung ailments. It withdraws funding for the enforcement of dredge and fill regulations that the EPA recently used to halt a big mountaintop-removal coal project in West Virginia. The legislation blocks a new Bureau of Land Management initiative to identify and protect pristine public lands in the West and withholds funding for a new Forest Service management plan that would restrict off-road vehicle use in national forests. It also removes Endangered Species Act protections for wolves in the northern Rockies and eliminates hundreds of millions of dollars from a federal land acquisition program. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, called the budget resolution a "slash-and-burn proposal" and "a backdoor attack on our national landmark environmental laws." The delta and San Joaquin River sections were written by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), who represents parts of the San Joaquin Valley and has previously introduced legislation to waive protections for salmon and the delta smelt and ramp up pumping from the delta, one of California's major sources of water. Nunes said his budget language was a "simple attempt to try to get some of our water back so we can put people back to work." He added that if his proposal died in the Senate, he would keep pursuing it. "Every chance that we have to amend a bill or pass a bill, we will be doing it," said Nunes, who on his House blog last year complained that " environmental radicals operating in the name of Gaia, Mother Earth, the Wiccan religion and a host of other cult-like organizations have litigated, legislated and extorted away the water needed for San Joaquin Valley communities." Terry Anderson, executive director of the Property and Environment Research Center, which promotes a free-market approach to environmental problems, said the cuts were driven more by political than budgetary concerns. And he argued that even if they went into effect, they would have a limited impact. "The regulations that won't be enforced haven't been the biggest drivers in improvements in environmental quality in recent years," Anderson said. "We have a clean environment, and we'll continue to clean it up because of technology. And that is largely a function of economic growth." Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 228349 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Mar 11 14:29:25 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:29:25 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal 3 9 2011 Message-ID: <003501cbe03b$c84fb3f0$58ef1bd0$@net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/styles/logo.gif Trinity weighs in on water issue BY SALLY MORRIS THE TRINITY JOURNAL Reminding everyone where the water originates, Trinity County supervisors have weighed in on recent efforts by Humboldt County to gain an additional 50,000 acre feet of water annually down the Trinity River. With assistance from the Hoopa and Yurok tribes, Humboldt began pressing the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation last fall to reconsider its stance on the water the county claims its been owed since the 1955 Act to dam Trinity River water and divert it to the Central Valley Project was approved. Reclamation has historically held that the 50,000 acre feet mentioned in the 1955 promise to make water available for the beneficial use of Humboldt County and other "downstream users" is included in the flows already sent down the river for fisheries. In a meeting last September with Reclamation Commissioner Mike Connor, Humboldt County and tribal representatives argued that current flows are specifically linked to fisheries and therefore cannot logically be considered available as promised for out-of-stream uses. No particular deadline was set for a decision by Reclamation though there was an agreement by the agency's leader in the Obama administration to re-evaluate its position concerning the 50,000 acre feet. Humboldt County and the tribes viewed that development alone as a milestone in their long fight for the water. But now Trinity County has weighed in. "We want the Bureau of Reclamation to make sure 'county of origin' protections are taken into consideration," said Trinity County Sup. Roger Jaegel. He worked with Sup. Judy Pflueger representing the Trinity Lake area and Arnold Whitridge, a longtime Trinity River restoration advocate and former county supervisor, to draft a letter of response to Commissioner Mike Connor. "We're going to fight for our water rights. That's what this is coming down to," Pflueger said as the Trinity Board of Supervisors voted to approve and send the letter last week. Connor, who also visited last fall with representatives of the Trinity River Restoration Program and interested local citizens, was thanked for his attention and commitment to clarifying the federal agency's obligations concerning the 50,000 acre feet. As he prepares to consult with local agencies on the matter, Trinity supervisors urged Connor to consider Trinity County's perspective as the county of origin in that all water in the Trinity reservoir originates here and the river flows for most of its length within Trinity County. The letter states: "Our citizens value the fish it sustains, the recreation it provides and the power it generates. Trinity County has actively participated in fishery restoration efforts on the river since fishery restoration efforts became necessary. Plainly, Trinity County citizens are 'downstream users' of Trinity reservoir releases." Furthermore, it says that any decision on allocation of water from the Trinity River and Trinity Lake should carefully consider Trinity County's preferential right as the county of origin. It also requests that the Bureau of Reclamation consult with Trinity County as a coordinating agency on decisions involving waters originating within the county. Regarding the status of the agency review, Jaegel said, "We haven't heard a word. They said they'd be consulting with all parties by the end of the year, but that didn't happen. We understand that Humboldt and the tribes, the Bureau of Reclamation and a lot of solicitors are all looking at that 50,000 acre feet, but the water originates here and we are also some of those 'downstream users' mentioned in the original legislation." Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 21223 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Mar 11 14:31:54 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:31:54 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal 3 9 2011 Message-ID: <003b01cbe03c$280077d0$78016770$@net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/styles/logo.gif Draft report suggests limited dredging BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL A suction dredger works the South Fork of the Salmon River in Siskiyou County before such activity was banned awaiting study. A suction dredger works the South Fork of the Salmon River in Siskiyou County before such activity was banned awaiting study. As a moratorium continues on suction dredge mining for gold in California, the state Department of Fish and Game has proposed new regulations on the activity to protect fish. The DFG is taking public comment on the recently released Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Suction Dredge Permitting Program. The agency prepared the document to comply with a court order. Suction dredge gold miners spend hours underwater in rivers, streams and lakes using a powerful vacuum to suck up sand, gravel and rock which is sent through a sluice box mounted on a floating platform. Most of the material continues through the sluice and out the other side, leaving the heavier gold in the sluice box. The draft document just released by DFG evaluates the potential environmental impacts of a proposed program and four alternatives. Under the proposed program, changes include: . A limit on the number of permits issued annually of 4,000, on a first-come, first served basis. Previously, there was no limit. On average, the DFG issued approximately 3,650 permits annually for the 15 years prior to the moratorium established in July 2009. However, in the early '80s, the number of permits issued was approximately 12,000. . Intake nozzles larger than 4 inches would not be allowed, except under certain conditions. Previously, nozzles could be up to 6 inches. Pump intakes would require screening. . Changes to seasonal and year-round closures for various water bodies throughout the state, based on potential for impacts to sensitive aquatic species. For example, the main stem Trinity River from the Humboldt line to the North Fork Trinity River would be open for dredging for four months from June 1 through Sept. 30. Many tributaries would be closed to suction dredging completely, such as the East Fork of the North Fork of the Trinity River. In other cases, streams that previously were closed to suction dredging would open to the activity. . There is also a long list of operating conditions, among them no dredging within three feet of the water's edge. Terry Cato, of Weaverville, has claims along the East Fork of the North Fork with his brother. He had not expected a complete closure there. "As a claimholder I'm not really pleased," Cato said. "I definitely plan on filing some type of response to it so it can be addressed in their final draft." Previously, the area was open to suction dredging from July through September. "That's not during spawning season at all," Cato said. Although mining has not been a big source of income for him, it has been a way of life for at least 18 years, Cato said, adding, "I have certain rights as a claim holder and a miner." >From the DFG, Environmental Program Manager Mark Stopher said the changes are proposed to protect many different kinds of fish, given updated information and species listed as threatened or endangered since regulations were previously written in 1994. "Most people think this is only about salmon and steelhead and it's not," he said, adding that statute says the DFG is to consider impacts to all fish, and that includes amphibians. While suction dredges are unlikely to harm adult fish, amphibians and smaller organisms aren't likely to survive a trip through a suction dredge, Stopher said. Furthermore, he said, the activity modifies habitat, including pools of cool water the fish use. "Sometimes it makes pools, sometimes it fills in pools," he said, adding that the new pools might not be as good a place for fish. He said the chief concern on the East Fork of the North Fork is displacement of coho salmon, which are listed under the Endangered Species Act. Unlike chinook salmon, they spend over a year rearing in tributaries before migrating to the ocean. "There are no windows when they aren't there," he said. There has been much debate about release of mercury by suction dredge miners. The miners note that they capture far more mercury than they release, while opponents say they stir up mercury that was under the riverbed. However, Stopher said the DFG's authority is limited, and while mercury may be a concern for humans consuming fish, "we did not change our regulations to control mercury because we couldn't find an effect on fish." The DFG's proposed changes came about as a result of a lawsuit. In 2005, the Karuk Tribe sued the agency for allowing suction dredge mining in areas known to be critical habitat for endangered and at-risk species. The suit ended in a court order in 2006 directing DFG to review and amend its regulations. The moratorium bill signed into law in 2009 suspended all suction dredging until DFG completes the mandated environmental impact report. Thousands of comments are expected on the draft document, and some could cause changes. A final environmental impact report and proposed regulations are expected to be released in the fall, with the new regulations to be in effect before the end of the year, Stopher said. Meanwhile, the temporary ban on suction dredge mining remains in effect - unless proposed legislation to lift the moratorium is successful. To comment Five public hearings on the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Suction Dredge Permitting Program have been scheduled throughout the state. Closest to Trinity, a hearing willbebeginat5pm.Thursday,March31,in Redding at the Shasta Senior Nutrition Program, 100 Mercy Oaks Drive, Redding, CA 96003. A 60-day public review period of the document ends April 29. Written comments should be directed to: California Department of Fish and Game, Attn: Mark Stopher, Suction Dredge Program Draft SEIR Comments, 601 Locust Street, Redding, CA 96001. Or e-mail dfgsuctiondredge at dfg.ca.gov. Documents can be reviewed online at www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge. Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 21223 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10211 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Sat Mar 12 11:44:17 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:44:17 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] If Salmon Could Speak to Governor Brown: Part 6 Message-ID: <00ba01cbe0ed$e76fdcd0$b64f9670$@net> The final of a six part series by Salmon Water Now. The Human Costs When salmon are in trouble, people are hurt. Fishing families that have depended upon healthy runs of salmon are themselves becoming extinct. Families are hurting. Coastal communities are in trouble. The infrastructure that supports both commercial and recreational fishing is under severe stress and close to collapsing. This video, the last of our six-part series speaks to these issues. Vimeo: http://www.vimeo.com/20952996 YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpAE8mpa-K0 &hd=1 Byron Leydecker, JcT Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Tue Mar 15 10:51:06 2011 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 10:51:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) is scheduled to meet April 12, 2011. The discussion topics are listed in the supplementary information area in the meeting notice. Respectfully, Vina Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2011)] [Notices] [Pages 14044-14045] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ http://www.gpo.gov/] [FR Doc No: 2011-5923] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2011-N044; 81331-1334-8TWG-W4] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a TAMWG meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG will meet from 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Tuesday, April 12, 2011. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Trinity County Library, 351 Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Randy A. Brown, TAMWG Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Jennifer Faler, Acting Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623- 1800; e-mail: jfaler at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a meeting of the TAMWG. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: Annual flow release schedule, New TAMWG charter, Acting Executive Director's Report, Channel rehabilitation policies, TRRP performance measures, Membership update, Election of TAMWG chair and vice-chair for 2011, and TAMWG bylaws. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. [[Page 14045]] Dated: March 9, 2011. Randy A. Brown, Designated Federal Officer, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2011-5923 Filed 3-14-11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Fri Mar 18 19:03:20 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 19:03:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Weir and Hatchery Totals Message-ID: <000b01cbe5d9$d3e78320$7bb68960$@net> Folks, The attached sheet has the final trapping totals for Junction City and Willow Creek weirs and Trinity River Hatchery for this year. I'll be starting next seasons summaries when Junction City weir is deployed, sometime in June or July. Thanks for all the good comments during the year! Wade Sinnen Associate Biologist Trinity River Project CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weirTRH_summary 2010 and Hatchery 3 18 11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 94208 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri Mar 25 14:43:52 2011 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 13:43:52 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Research Indicates Wild Fish Conservation Best Served By Minimizing Wild/Hatchery Interactions Message-ID: <20110325214400.B60FD19AFF9F@mx.dcn.davis.ca.us> THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com March 25, 2011 Issue No. 568 * Research Indicates Wild Fish Conservation Best Served By Minimizing Wild/Hatchery Interactions An exhaustive look at available data for 89 populations of chinook and coho salmon and steelhead shows that productivity in the wild shrinks in direct proportion with increases in the percentage of hatchery fish that join wild fish on the spawning grounds. ?Our results suggest that the net reproductive performance of the population will decline under all of the hatchery scenarios,? according to ?Reduced recruitment performance in natural populations of anadromous salmonids associated with hatchery-reared fish,? a research paper published in the March 2011 edition of the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. The paper was authored by Mark Chilcote of NOAA Fisheries and Ken Goodson and Matt Falcy of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. The paper can be found at: http://cjfas.nrc.ca ?While using hatchery fish in the short-term to reduce extinction risk and temporarily boost depressed wild populations to re-establish normative biological function are laudable conservation roles, such actions come at a cost in terms of reductions in per capita recruitment performance,? the paper says. ?Therefore, we conclude, as did Chilcote (2003) and Nickelson (2003), that under most circumstances the long-term conservation of wild populations is best served by the implementation of measures that minimize the interactions between wild and hatchery fish. When considering the bookends ? a totally wild spawning population vs. a spawning population comprised 100 percent of fish from hatchery origins ? the conclusion was stark. The hatchery populations on average produced only 12.8 percent of the recruits (the number of fish that have matured in the ocean as counted before they encounter fisheries) produced by the wild population. ?The effect of hatchery fish on reproductive performance was the same among all three species. Further, the impact of hatchery fish from ?wild type? hatchery broodstocks was no less adverse than hatchery fish from traditional, domesticated broodstocks. ?We also found no support for the hypothesis that a population?s reproductive performance was affected by the length of exposure to hatchery fish,? the paper says. ?In most cases, measures that minimize the interactions between wild and hatchery fish will be the best long-term conservation strategy for wild populations.? The analysis shows that it?s wise to ?keep the hatchery fish off the spawning grounds as much as possible if the goal is to rebuild the wild population,? said Goodson, the ODFW?s Conservation Planning coordinator. ?We kind of suggest that supplementation might not be the way to go,? in many cases, Goodson said. ?If the fish are going to wink out because there are problems? that won?t be remedied in the shorter-term, supplementing wild populations with hatchery fish may be necessary, Goodson said. ?In some cases that is all we can do.? But the paper advises that such decisions should be weighed carefully. ?Supplementing natural spawning areas with hatchery fish to benefit the local wild population is a conservation tool that has seen widespread use in the Pacific Northwest (ISAB 2003),? the paper says. ?The intent of this activity includes re-establishing natural production in vacant habitats, lessening the risk of demographic extinction for wild populations, ensuring the available habitats are seeded to full capacity, and maintenance of genetic lineages. ?Depending on the circumstances there is a balance between risks and benefits that conservation managers must accurately assess and act on if supplementation programs are to be successful and achieve their intended effect,? the paper says. The analysis indicates that using wild fish as broodstock in so-called integrated programs does not necessarily make a more wild-friendly hatchery fish. ?Surprisingly, we found that neither length of time exposed to hatchery fish nor hatchery type has any effect on a population?s intrinsic productivity,? the paper says. ?The incorporation of wild fish into hatchery broodstocks has been undertaken with the expectation it will ensure that the hatchery fish produced will be genetically similar to the local wild fish. ?Therefore, it is assumed that such genetically similar hatchery fish, if they escape capture and spawn in the natural habitat, will not harm, and may in fact benefit the conservation of the wild population. ?Use of wild fish for hatchery broodstock is a cornerstone of hatchery reforms currently being implemented for salmon and steelhead hatchery programs across much of the Pacific Northwest (USFWS 2010),? the paper says. ?However, our findings call into question the effectiveness of this path as a means to lessen the impact of hatchery programs on wild populations.? For the analysis the researchers selected 93 populations (four later were dropped for a variety of reasons) of anadromous salmonids from the states of Oregon, Washington and Idaho that were known to contain both wild and hatchery fish. They employed annual estimates from 1981 to 2000 of parental (spawner) abundance for each population that were based on information sources that differed by species and region. They then estimated the proportion of hatchery fish in the natural spawning population. The next step was to estimate the ?preharvest number of adult progeny (recruits) naturally produced by each brood year of spawners using the following four-step process,? the paper says. ?First, we estimated annual return abundance by dividing the fishery survival rate, calculated as 1 - fishery mortality rate, into the observed number of wild spawners. Next, we split each return into age categories, on the basis of the assumed proportion of different age at maturity for each population. ?A table of return estimates by each age category was then constructed, and members produced by each brood year were identified,? the paper says. ?Finally, all members of each brood year were totaled to yield an estimate of recruits.? ?Our primary finding is that across a broad geographical range and three different species, Ph (the percentage of hatchery fish on the spawning ground) was a population characteristic that is negatively associated with reproductive performance,? the paper says. ?Intrinsic productivity declines as the fraction of the hatchery spawners in the natural population increases. ?We came to this conclusion after considering 12 different models that attempted to weigh the effect of four other covariates in addition to Ph.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Fri Mar 25 16:13:06 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 16:13:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Research Indicates Wild Fish Conservation Best Served By Minimizing Wild/Hatchery Interactions In-Reply-To: <20110325214400.B60FD19AFF9F@mx.dcn.davis.ca.us> References: <20110325214400.B60FD19AFF9F@mx.dcn.davis.ca.us> Message-ID: <20110325231308.ILSQ6996.omta02.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Sun Mar 27 15:09:45 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 15:09:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange! Message-ID: <000e01cbeccb$ae741330$0b5c3990$@net> From: Dan Bacher [mailto:danielbacher at fishsniffer.com] Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 1:49 PM Subject: Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange! Below is information about a great event hosted by the Klamath Justice Coalition and Klamath Riverkeeper in Arcata this Friday, April 1, at 6 p.m. Thanks Dan Dear friends, This Friday, April 1 is the Speak for the Klamath fundraiser hosted by the Klamath Justice Coalition and Klamath Riverkeeper at the Bayside Grange in Arcata (flyer attached). It would be great to see you there. The event features frybread tacos, local beer and wine, an auction of local art, film shorts, spoken word, live music and t-shirt sales. Doors open at 6 p.m., and there's a suggested $10 donation. Proceeds from the event will help send a delegation of Klamath River activists to Washington D.C. to advocate dam removal on the Klamath. We'd really appreciate your support, whether it's by attending the event, volunteering (if you or someone you know can volunteer, please e-mail me) or spreading the word! Become a shareholder in one of the world's largest restoration projects and join the movement to restore an almost 16,000 square mile ecosystem. Erica Terence Conservation Director/Executive Director Klamath Riverkeeper PO Box 751 Somes Bar, CA 95568 530.627.3311 (office) 530.340.5415 (cell) http://www.klamathriver.org Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Speak For The Klamath Flyer_040111_email.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 3748167 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Mon Mar 28 08:58:31 2011 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 08:58:31 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange???? In-Reply-To: <000e01cbeccb$ae741330$0b5c3990$@net> References: <000e01cbeccb$ae741330$0b5c3990$@net> Message-ID: <4D90B027.4000507@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Mon Mar 28 09:47:43 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 09:47:43 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange???? In-Reply-To: <4D90B027.4000507@msaj.com> References: <000e01cbeccb$ae741330$0b5c3990$@net> <4D90B027.4000507@msaj.com> Message-ID: <20110328164748.UTEY6996.omta02.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From summerhillfarmpv at aol.com Mon Mar 28 10:12:43 2011 From: summerhillfarmpv at aol.com (summerhillfarmpv at aol.com) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:12:43 EDT Subject: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange???? Message-ID: <31b12.39367e2e.3ac21b8b@aol.com> Tom, Bill, et all, I think we are getting distracted from the real issues here. We have differing opinions on what the KHSA and KBRA will do for the river and fishery. Some say it means less water for the river and some the opposite. The fact is that in most years there will be much more water going to the river than in the past, especially during dry years. Take a look at the graphs on historical diversions vs. what will happen under the KBRA. Glen Spain and I worked for nearly 2 months to prevent waiver of the ESA requirements in the critically dry years, so meeting the BiOp requirements is still required, and thus the ag allotment can be lowered based on that if needed. It's true, more water is going to Ag than we in the negotiations wanted, but that was the compromise we made based on additional restoration, ground water management and over-sight, along with a volunteer water right reduction program for upper basin Ag. Tom Hardy was very clear in our science meeting in Mt. Shasta that he felt the reduced flows in the river under drought conditions would work for fish as long as the dams were out. My memory was that flows as low as 700 cfs would support the fishery. I realize Hoopa biologist disagreed, as did Bill Trush, but all others agreed with Tom (24 biologists). The KBRA and KHSA are not perfect agreements only because they don't provide everything the environmental community and Tribes would like. That said, if they were perfect to all of us, it never would have reached the agreement state we now have. Frankly, all sides have to feel they can "live with the final agreement" and that is what happened. No side felt "they won", yet neither did they feel they lost. Let's not forget that nearly $600 million was already committed to the Klamath basin recovery, so to say we're adding a $1 Billion dollar deal here is not totally accurate. Pacific Corp has done their work to determine what is in their best interest and that is the KHSA, and I don't think any of the rest of us want the dams to stay. This is the best path forward in the shortest amount of time. Why can't we work together to get it done instead of fighting over who is right? The deals are only as good as the effort put in to get them completed. If the two deals get completed the basin will be better off than today, and we have the chance to have salmon and steelhead in the upper basin for the first time in nearly 100 years. Implementation of the other pieces are critical to flows, and that needs to get completed. Undermining the agreements only means that none of it gets completed, which I see as a huge loss for the basin, its communities and the fishery. Mark Rockwell In a message dated 3/28/2011 9:48:04 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kierassociates at suddenlink.net writes: Tom With the greatest respect and regard for your counsel, believe me, Ive just got to stick my oar in here : At the time of the administrative proceedings in Sacramento - when was that, 2007 ? - most of the fish agency folks thoroughly believed your proposition, below, that 'The only license FERC can issue to PacifiCorp will require construction of full volitional fish passage, work so expensive that PacifiCorp will remove the dams instead.' The prob with the way that we regulate utilities, however, is that the utility can recover the full cost of mandated improvements to its assets - plus its established rate of profit - X% on top of its (the ratepayers') out of pocket costs So the world of utility regulation is this sort of upside-down business model where greater expenses actually add profit (and dividends for the utilities' shareholders) - goofy, I know, and hard to keep one's brain wrapped around - but that's the way it is. The volitional fish passage work, had it been the path taken, would have been idiotic - but profitable to the utility/ its shareholders That said, I, too, wish for satisfaction of PacifiCorps' Clean Water Act responsibilities. 'Best to all, Bill At 08:58 AM 3/28/2011, Tom Schlosser wrote: Please note that this event raises funds for the legislative effort that's very questionable and quite controversial in the Basin.B The legislation demanded by PacifiCorp and the other KHSA parties must also ratify the KBRA, complete with its unfair allocation of water away from the Klamath River, and its required billion in federal appropriations. Rather than lobbying Congress for this poorly designed legislation, parties should be lobbying the SWRCB and ODEQ to complete their CWA Sec. 401 application processes and let the FERC process resume.B The only license FERC can issue to PacifiCorp will require construction of full volitional fish passage, work so expensive that PacifiCorp will remove the dams instead. FERC has a decommissioning policy that works. See Tacoma v. FERC _http://www.msaj.com/cases/051054a.pdf_ (http://www.msaj.com/cases/051054a.pdf) Legislation isn't necessary for dam removal. PacifiCorp made a deal (with some groups and pols) which has no fixed removal date. They like that. They're cheerfully watching the process go sideways, ...which they have every right to do under the KHSA. Folks need to read the documents carefully and examine the exit options. Tom On 3/27/2011 3:09 PM, Byron Leydecker wrote: B B From: Dan Bacher [_ mailto:danielbacher at fishsniffer.com_ (mailto:danielbacher at fishsniffer.com) ] Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 1:49 PM Subject: Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange! B Below is information about a great event hosted by the Klamath Justice Coalition and Klamath Riverkeeper in Arcata this Friday, April 1, at 6 p.m. B Thanks Dan B Dear friends, B This Friday, April 1 is the Speak for the Klamath fundraiser hosted by the Klamath Justice Coalition and Klamath Riverkeeper at the Bayside Grange in Arcata (flyer attached). It would be great to see you there. B The event features frybread tacos, local beer and wine, an auction of local art, film shorts, spoken word, live music and t-shirt sales. Doors open at 6 p.m., and there's a suggested $10 donation. Proceeds from the event will help send a delegation of Klamath River activists to Washington D.C. to advocate dam removal on the Klamath. B We'd really appreciate your support, whether it's by attending the event, volunteering (if you or someone you know can volunteer, please e-mail me) or spreading the word! Become a shareholder in one of the world's largest restoration projects and join the movement to restore an almost 16,000 square mile ecosystem. B Erica Terence Conservation Director/Executive Director Klamath Riverkeeper PO Box 751 Somes Bar, CA 95568 B 530.627.3311 (office) 530.340.5415 (cell) B _http://www.klamathriver.org_ (http://www.klamathriver.org/) B B Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile _bwl3 at comcast.net_ (mailto:bwl3 at comcast.net) _bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org_ (mailto:bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org) _http://www.fotr.org_ (http://www.fotr.org/) B B B B _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list _ env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us_ (mailto:env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us) _ http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity_ (http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity) -- _Important notices_ (http://www.schlosserlawfiles.com/CONFIDENTIALITY%20NOTICE%20040606.pdf) _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us _http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity_ (http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity) Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O. Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 707.668.1822 mobile: 498.7847 _http://www.kierassociates.net _ (http://www.kierassociates.net/) GSA Advantage Contractor GS-10F-0124U _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Mon Mar 28 10:26:32 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 10:26:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange???? In-Reply-To: <31b12.39367e2e.3ac21b8b@aol.com> References: <31b12.39367e2e.3ac21b8b@aol.com> Message-ID: <20110328172637.WTRB6996.omta02.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Mon Mar 28 10:27:53 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 10:27:53 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange???? In-Reply-To: <20110328172637.WTRB6996.omta02.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenl ink.net> References: <31b12.39367e2e.3ac21b8b@aol.com> <20110328172637.WTRB6996.omta02.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> Message-ID: <20110328172759.YGDJ25469.omta01.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From windhorse at jeffnet.org Mon Mar 28 10:52:28 2011 From: windhorse at jeffnet.org (Jim Carpenter) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 10:52:28 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at BaysideGrange???? References: <31b12.39367e2e.3ac21b8b@aol.com> Message-ID: <7EFEA736AF4147A097D2487555AFDDC8@windhorse> Greetings, All good comments, however it should be noted it's not just tribes and enviros that are opposed, a small minority (though vocal and well connected) of the ag community here in the Upper Basin contunue their attacks on both agreements, and as noted, this works well for PacifiCorp since they can go on with annual extensions to their expired permit for years while others stir the pot for them. Having worked on Klamath water issues for the past 20 years it's my perception that it is past time for us all to join ranks and work for a truly sustainable ecosystem in the broadest sense of the word, organized around a free flowing Klamath River. What more compelling vision for our future could there be than undertaking a restoration project on this scale, imperfect and unresolved as some of the details may be? Jim Visit our Websites: www.CarpenterDesign.com www.BirdingandBoating.com 541 885 5450 ----- Original Message ----- From: summerhillfarmpv at aol.com To: kierassociates at suddenlink.net ; t.schlosser at msaj.com ; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 10:12 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at BaysideGrange???? Tom, Bill, et all, I think we are getting distracted from the real issues here. We have differing opinions on what the KHSA and KBRA will do for the river and fishery. Some say it means less water for the river and some the opposite. The fact is that in most years there will be much more water going to the river than in the past, especially during dry years. Take a look at the graphs on historical diversions vs. what will happen under the KBRA. Glen Spain and I worked for nearly 2 months to prevent waiver of the ESA requirements in the critically dry years, so meeting the BiOp requirements is still required, and thus the ag allotment can be lowered based on that if needed. It's true, more water is going to Ag than we in the negotiations wanted, but that was the compromise we made based on additional restoration, ground water management and over-sight, along with a volunteer water right reduction program for upper basin Ag. Tom Hardy was very clear in our science meeting in Mt. Shasta that he felt the reduced flows in the river under drought conditions would work for fish as long as the dams were out. My memory was that flows as low as 700 cfs would support the fishery. I realize Hoopa biologist disagreed, as did Bill Trush, but all others agreed with Tom (24 biologists). The KBRA and KHSA are not perfect agreements only because they don't provide everything the environmental community and Tribes would like. That said, if they were perfect to all of us, it never would have reached the agreement state we now have. Frankly, all sides have to feel they can "live with the final agreement" and that is what happened. No side felt "they won", yet neither did they feel they lost. Let's not forget that nearly $600 million was already committed to the Klamath basin recovery, so to say we're adding a $1 Billion dollar deal here is not totally accurate. Pacific Corp has done their work to determine what is in their best interest and that is the KHSA, and I don't think any of the rest of us want the dams to stay. This is the best path forward in the shortest amount of time. Why can't we work together to get it done instead of fighting over who is right? The deals are only as good as the effort put in to get them completed. If the two deals get completed the basin will be better off than today, and we have the chance to have salmon and steelhead in the upper basin for the first time in nearly 100 years. Implementation of the other pieces are critical to flows, and that needs to get completed. Undermining the agreements only means that none of it gets completed, which I see as a huge loss for the basin, its communities and the fishery. Mark Rockwell In a message dated 3/28/2011 9:48:04 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, kierassociates at suddenlink.net writes: Tom With the greatest respect and regard for your counsel, believe me, Ive just got to stick my oar in here : At the time of the administrative proceedings in Sacramento - when was that, 2007 ? - most of the fish agency folks thoroughly believed your proposition, below, that 'The only license FERC can issue to PacifiCorp will require construction of full volitional fish passage, work so expensive that PacifiCorp will remove the dams instead.' The prob with the way that we regulate utilities, however, is that the utility can recover the full cost of mandated improvements to its assets - plus its established rate of profit - X% on top of its (the ratepayers') out of pocket costs So the world of utility regulation is this sort of upside-down business model where greater expenses actually add profit (and dividends for the utilities' shareholders) - goofy, I know, and hard to keep one's brain wrapped around - but that's the way it is. The volitional fish passage work, had it been the path taken, would have been idiotic - but profitable to the utility/ its shareholders That said, I, too, wish for satisfaction of PacifiCorps' Clean Water Act responsibilities. 'Best to all, Bill At 08:58 AM 3/28/2011, Tom Schlosser wrote: Please note that this event raises funds for the legislative effort that's very questionable and quite controversial in the Basin.B The legislation demanded by PacifiCorp and the other KHSA parties must also ratify the KBRA, complete with its unfair allocation of water away from the Klamath River, and its required billion in federal appropriations. Rather than lobbying Congress for this poorly designed legislation, parties should be lobbying the SWRCB and ODEQ to complete their CWA Sec. 401 application processes and let the FERC process resume.B The only license FERC can issue to PacifiCorp will require construction of full volitional fish passage, work so expensive that PacifiCorp will remove the dams instead. FERC has a decommissioning policy that works. See Tacoma v. FERC http://www.msaj.com/cases/051054a.pdf Legislation isn't necessary for dam removal. PacifiCorp made a deal (with some groups and pols) which has no fixed removal date. They like that. They're cheerfully watching the process go sideways, ...which they have every right to do under the KHSA. Folks need to read the documents carefully and examine the exit options. Tom On 3/27/2011 3:09 PM, Byron Leydecker wrote: B B From: Dan Bacher [ mailto:danielbacher at fishsniffer.com] Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 1:49 PM Subject: Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange! B Below is information about a great event hosted by the Klamath Justice Coalition and Klamath Riverkeeper in Arcata this Friday, April 1, at 6 p.m. B Thanks Dan B Dear friends, B This Friday, April 1 is the Speak for the Klamath fundraiser hosted by the Klamath Justice Coalition and Klamath Riverkeeper at the Bayside Grange in Arcata (flyer attached). It would be great to see you there. B The event features frybread tacos, local beer and wine, an auction of local art, film shorts, spoken word, live music and t-shirt sales. Doors open at 6 p.m., and there's a suggested $10 donation. Proceeds from the event will help send a delegation of Klamath River activists to Washington D.C. to advocate dam removal on the Klamath. B We'd really appreciate your support, whether it's by attending the event, volunteering (if you or someone you know can volunteer, please e-mail me) or spreading the word! Become a shareholder in one of the world's largest restoration projects and join the movement to restore an almost 16,000 square mile ecosystem. B Erica Terence Conservation Director/Executive Director Klamath Riverkeeper PO Box 751 Somes Bar, CA 95568 B 530.627.3311 (office) 530.340.5415 (cell) B http://www.klamathriver.org B B Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org B B B B _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -- Important notices _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O. Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 707.668.1822 mobile: 498.7847 http://www.kierassociates.net GSA Advantage Contractor GS-10F-0124U _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Mon Mar 28 11:07:12 2011 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:07:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange???? In-Reply-To: <31b12.39367e2e.3ac21b8b@aol.com> References: <31b12.39367e2e.3ac21b8b@aol.com> Message-ID: <4D90CE50.90802@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Mon Mar 28 15:03:56 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 15:03:56 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: Reclamation Announces Increases to Water Supply Allocations for CVP Water Users South of the Delta Message-ID: <004e01cbed94$0a769f40$1f63ddc0$@net> Reclamation News Release Header Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-11-043 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: March 28, 2011 Reclamation Announces Increases to Water Supply Allocations for CVP Water Users South of the Delta Following on the commitment by Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar to continually monitor and evaluate the reservoir levels and water run-off within California?s Central Valley Project (CVP) to determine if additional supplies can be made available to CVP water contractors as quickly as possible, the Bureau of Reclamation today announces increases to the water supply allocations for users south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta for the 2011 contract year. On March 22, Reclamation announced increases to the 2011 water supply allocations for South-of-Delta agricultural and Municipal and Industrial (M&I) water users from 50 to 55 percent and 75 to 80 percent, respectively. Now, additional precipitation in California, which has been used to update runoff projections, allows for further increases to the allocations. The allocation for South-of-Delta agricultural water service contractors is increased from 55 percent to 65 percent of their contract total, and the allocation for South-of-Delta M&I contractors is increased from 80 percent to 90 percent of historic use. ?The allocation now exceeds the 20-year average of 62 percent for South-of-Delta agricultural water service contractors, and additional increases are still possible. It should be noted, however, that due to the deterioration in the Delta environment, restrictions in South-of-Delta pumping are likely to continue during certain times of the year,? said Reclamation Commissioner Michael Connor. ?The Bay-Delta Conservation Plan offers the best opportunity for a comprehensive solution that addresses the dual needs of water supply reliability and environmental restoration, and we remain committed to that effort.? Reclamation will continue to monitor all developing water supply data and look for additional opportunities to increase the allocations in the coming weeks. Under the terms of various CVP water contracts, the updated allocations are as follows: * Increased to 65 percent: Agricultural water service contractors South-of-Delta are allocated 65 percent of their contract supply of 1.965 million acre-feet, an increase of 10 percent from the update announced on March 22, 2011, and 15 percent from the initial allocation in February. * Increased to 90 percent: South-of-Delta M&I contractors are allocated 90 percent of historic use, an increase of 10 percent from the update announced on March 22, 2011, and 15 percent from the initial allocation in February. * Unchanged at 100 percent: Agricultural water service contractors North-of-Delta are allocated 100 percent of their contract supply of 443,000 acre-feet. * Unchanged at 100 percent: M&I water service contractors North-of-Delta are allocated 100 percent of their contract supply of approximately 340,000 acre-feet. * Unchanged at 100 percent: Sacramento River Settlement Contractors and San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors, who receive their CVP water supply based on a pre-CVP water right, are allocated 100 percent of their contract supply of 2.2 million acre-feet and 800,000 acre-feet respectively. * Unchanged at 100 percent: Wildlife refuges (Level 2) North- and South-of-Delta, whose allocations are based on a pre-established inflow trigger to Shasta Reservoir, are allocated 100 percent of their contract supply of 422,000 acre-feet. * Unchanged at 100 percent: Eastside water service contractors (Central San Joaquin Water Conservancy District and Stockton East Water District), whose water supplies are delivered from New Melones Reservoir on the Stanislaus River, are allocated their full contract supply of 155,000 acre-feet. * Unchanged at 100 percent Class 1 and 20 percent Class 2: Friant Division contractors? water supply is delivered from Millerton Reservoir on the upper San Joaquin River. The first 800,000 acre-feet of water supply is considered Class 1; any remaining water is considered Class 2. The Friant Division water supply allocation is 100 percent of Class 1 (800,000 acre-feet) and 20 percent of the contracted supply of 1.4 million acre-feet of Class 2 (280,000 acre-feet). Changes to hydrology and opportunities to exercise operational flexibility of the CVP are factors and conditions that will influence the water supply and allocations as the water year progresses. Water supply updates will be made monthly or more often as appropriate and will be posted at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/. For additional information, please visit http://www.usbr.gov/mp/pa/water or contact the Mid-Pacific Region?s Public Affairs Office at 916-978-5100 (TTY 916-978-5608) or e-mail mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov. # # # Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From AKrause at usbr.gov Wed Mar 30 17:20:37 2011 From: AKrause at usbr.gov (Krause, Andreas F) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 18:20:37 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: News Release: Meetings Scheduled on Proposed Trinity River Restoration Flows Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A6A12A82A@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> FYI From: Geissinger, Steve Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:15 PM Subject: News Release: Meetings Scheduled on Proposed Trinity River Restoration Flows All -- The attached news release was sent out today, Wednesday, March 30, 2011. The news release is also included below for those unable to view the PDF attachment. Thank you. - Steve [cid:image001.jpg at 01CBEEED.4E16FBA0] Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-11-045 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: March 30, 2011 Proposed Trinity River Restoration High-Flow Releases of Up to 11,000 Cubic Feet Per Second Are Under Consideration The Bureau of Reclamation announced today that two public meetings will be held to discuss upcoming high-flow releases from Lewiston Dam to the Trinity River this spring as part of the Trinity River Restoration Program. High flows typically begin on April 22, reach their peak in May, then gradually decrease to the summer base flow of 450 cubic feet per second (cfs) by late July. Peak releases typically range from 1,500 cfs to 11,000 cfs, depending on the year. One of the proposals to be discussed at the public meetings will be a peak high flow release of 11,000 cfs for up to four days in duration this May. The purpose of the proposed 11,000 cfs release is to interact with recently completed channel rehabilitation projects aimed at restoring salmon and steelhead habitat. To prepare the river for a release of 11,000 cfs, the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) replaced four bridges, 124 wells, and upgraded roads and other infrastructure from 2003 through 2009. The largest release to date as part of TRRP was 10,400 cfs in 2006. The public is invited to attend the meetings on the proposed high-flow release alternatives. The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group will meet on April 12, 2011, at Trinity County Library, 351 Main Street, in Weaverville, California; and the Trinity Management Council will meet on April 13 and April 14, at the Yurok Tribal Office on Hwy 96 in Weicthpec, California. The Trinity Management Council will make a recommendation to Reclamation, which has final authority over flow releases to the Trinity River. Notice of the final flow releases will be issued by Reclamation's Trinity River Division. The public should take appropriate safety precautions whenever river flows are high. A Record of Decision signed by the Secretary of the Interior in December 2000 outlines the plan to implement recovery of the Trinity River and its fish and wildlife populations. Information about the TRRP is available by calling the program's office at 530-623-1800 or visiting the TRRP office, located at 1313 South Main Street in Weaverville. Additional information is available online at http://www.trrp.net/water/index.htm, where there are provisions to subscribe for email notifications of Trinity River flow releases. # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 22654 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MP-11-045 Meetings Scheduled on Proposed Trinity River Restoration Flows.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 25323 bytes Desc: MP-11-045 Meetings Scheduled on Proposed Trinity River Restoration Flows.pdf URL: From summerhillfarmpv at aol.com Wed Mar 30 18:03:58 2011 From: summerhillfarmpv at aol.com (summerhillfarmpv at aol.com) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 21:03:58 EDT Subject: [env-trinity] Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange???? Message-ID: <3bc69.d57f841.3ac52cfe@aol.com> I knew when I replied that I'd get this type of response back. I'm not interested in continued exchanges, only in getting this done, realizing some will battle to the end to block. The perfect is the enemy of the good in this case. Opinions are unlikely to change, and the proof will be in the doing. Tom, I respect you, just don't agree. Mark R. In a message dated 3/28/2011 11:03:19 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, t.schlosser at msaj.com writes: Bill's point about utility regulation is generally right but I think PacifiCorp cannot show that incurring the cost of providing up/down fish passage is recoverable from ratepayers. FERC won't mandate those improvements but their offer of a license will be conditioned on acceptance of the costs of improvements. PacifiCorp will reject that license. Their submissions to the Oregon PUC and the CPUC in support of surcharging ratepayers to raise funds for dam removal showed that dam removal was the most cost effective solution. I don't think they can change their minds now and say that the public interest favors incurring the larger costs and risks of building volitional passage. The OPUC's informative but length _order on the subject is here_ (http://www.schlosserlawfiles.com/~hoopa/Surchargeorder091610.pdf) . Mark's claim that "in most years there will be much more water going to the river than in the past, especially during dry years" is just hogwash. This compares the river trickles released by Reclamation (in defiance of the ESA and the needs of fish from 1974 until 2001) with the post KBRA flows. A fairer comparison is between the ESA BiOp and KBRA: the KBRA does not fare better in that comparison, indeed it seeks to reduce the ESA requirements. Mark's efforts to "prevent waiver of the ESA requirements in the critically dry years" failed. Instead, he and other parties agreed in sec. 21.3.1.B to support changes in the BiOp requirements in order to facilitate the Reclamation diversions of water that have nearly destroyed the fishery. That subsection says: " ii. Support for Regulatory Approvals of Diversion Limitations a. Each such Party shall support the issuance of Regulatory Approvals for diversion of water for the Klamath Reclamation Project subject to the diversion limitations identified in Appendix E-1, including the obligations of Federal and State Agency Parties stated in Section 21.3.1.A." The draft drought plan doesn't change any of this--one of the reasons all should comment on it before the April 15, 2011 deadline. And one final sore point--the "nearly $600 million was already committed to the Klamath basin recovery, so to say we're adding a $1 Billion dollar deal here is not totally accurate" The idea of reprogramming $600 million of federal funding in the Basin--money going to things like the Trinity River Restoration Program--to pay instead for the huge subsidies to irrigation pumpers and the "on-project water plan" is just ridiculous. Tom The claim that On 3/28/2011 10:12 AM, _summerhillfarmpv at aol.com_ (mailto:summerhillfarmpv at aol.com) wrote: Tom, Bill, et all, I think we are getting distracted from the real issues here. We have differing opinions on what the KHSA and KBRA will do for the river and fishery. Some say it means less water for the river and some the opposite. The fact is that in most years there will be much more water going to the river than in the past, especially during dry years. Take a look at the graphs on historical diversions vs. what will happen under the KBRA. Glen Spain and I worked for nearly 2 months to prevent waiver of the ESA requirements in the critically dry years, so meeting the BiOp requirements is still required, and thus the ag allotment can be lowered based on that if needed. It's true, more water is going to Ag than we in the negotiations wanted, but that was the compromise we made based on additional restoration, ground water management and over-sight, along with a volunteer water right reduction program for upper basin Ag. Tom Hardy was very clear in our science meeting in Mt. Shasta that he felt the reduced flows in the river under drought conditions would work for fish as long as the dams were out. My memory was that flows as low as 700 cfs would support the fishery. I realize Hoopa biologist disagreed, as did Bill Trush, but all others agreed with Tom (24 biologists). The KBRA and KHSA are not perfect agreements only because they don't provide everything the environmental community and Tribes would like. That said, if they were perfect to all of us, it never would have reached the agreement state we now have. Frankly, all sides have to feel they can "live with the final agreement" and that is what happened. No side felt "they won", yet neither did they feel they lost. Let's not forget that nearly $600 million was already committed to the Klamath basin recovery, so to say we're adding a $1 Billion dollar deal here is not totally accurate. Pacific Corp has done their work to determine what is in their best interest and that is the KHSA, and I don't think any of the rest of us want the dams to stay. This is the best path forward in the shortest amount of time. Why can't we work together to get it done instead of fighting over who is right? The deals are only as good as the effort put in to get them completed. If the two deals get completed the basin will be better off than today, and we have the chance to have salmon and steelhead in the upper basin for the first time in nearly 100 years. Implementation of the other pieces are critical to flows, and that needs to get completed. Undermining the agreements only means that none of it gets completed, which I see as a huge loss for the basin, its communities and the fishery. Mark Rockwell In a message dated 3/28/2011 9:48:04 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, _kierassociates at suddenlink.net_ (mailto:kierassociates at suddenlink.net) writes: Tom With the greatest respect and regard for your counsel, believe me, Ive just got to stick my oar in here : At the time of the administrative proceedings in Sacramento - when was that, 2007 ? - most of the fish agency folks thoroughly believed your proposition, below, that 'The only license FERC can issue to PacifiCorp will require construction of full volitional fish passage, work so expensive that PacifiCorp will remove the dams instead.' The prob with the way that we regulate utilities, however, is that the utility can recover the full cost of mandated improvements to its assets - plus its established rate of profit - X% on top of its (the ratepayers') out of pocket costs So the world of utility regulation is this sort of upside-down business model where greater expenses actually add profit (and dividends for the utilities' shareholders) - goofy, I know, and hard to keep one's brain wrapped around - but that's the way it is. The volitional fish passage work, had it been the path taken, would have been idiotic - but profitable to the utility/ its shareholders That said, I, too, wish for satisfaction of PacifiCorps' Clean Water Act responsibilities. 'Best to all, Bill At 08:58 AM 3/28/2011, Tom Schlosser wrote: Please note that this event raises funds for the legislative effort that's very questionable and quite controversial in the Basin.B The legislation demanded by PacifiCorp and the other KHSA parties must also ratify the KBRA, complete with its unfair allocation of water away from the Klamath River, and its required billion in federal appropriations. Rather than lobbying Congress for this poorly designed legislation, parties should be lobbying the SWRCB and ODEQ to complete their CWA Sec. 401 application processes and let the FERC process resume.B The only license FERC can issue to PacifiCorp will require construction of full volitional fish passage, work so expensive that PacifiCorp will remove the dams instead. FERC has a decommissioning policy that works. See Tacoma v. FERC _http://www.msaj.com/cases/051054a.pdf_ (http://www.msaj.com/cases/051054a.pdf) Legislation isn't necessary for dam removal. PacifiCorp made a deal (with some groups and pols) which has no fixed removal date. They like that. They're cheerfully watching the process go sideways, ...which they have every right to do under the KHSA. Folks need to read the documents carefully and examine the exit options. Tom On 3/27/2011 3:09 PM, Byron Leydecker wrote: B B From: Dan Bacher [_ mailto:danielbacher at fishsniffer.com_ (mailto:danielbacher at fishsniffer.com) ] Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 1:49 PM Subject: Speak For the Klamath FRIDAY APR 1 at Bayside Grange! B Below is information about a great event hosted by the Klamath Justice Coalition and Klamath Riverkeeper in Arcata this Friday, April 1, at 6 p.m. B Thanks Dan B Dear friends, B This Friday, April 1 is the Speak for the Klamath fundraiser hosted by the Klamath Justice Coalition and Klamath Riverkeeper at the Bayside Grange in Arcata (flyer attached). It would be great to see you there. B The event features frybread tacos, local beer and wine, an auction of local art, film shorts, spoken word, live music and t-shirt sales. Doors open at 6 p.m., and there's a suggested $10 donation. Proceeds from the event will help send a delegation of Klamath River activists to Washington D.C. to advocate dam removal on the Klamath. B We'd really appreciate your support, whether it's by attending the event, volunteering (if you or someone you know can volunteer, please e-mail me) or spreading the word! Become a shareholder in one of the world's largest restoration projects and join the movement to restore an almost 16,000 square mile ecosystem. B Erica Terence Conservation Director/Executive Director Klamath Riverkeeper PO Box 751 Somes Bar, CA 95568 B 530.627.3311 (office) 530.340.5415 (cell) B _http://www.klamathriver.org_ (http://www.klamathriver.org/) B B Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile _bwl3 at comcast.net_ (mailto:bwl3 at comcast.net) _bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org_ (mailto:bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org) _http://www.fotr.org_ (http://www.fotr.org/) B B B B _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list _ env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us_ (mailto:env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us) _ http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity_ (http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity) -- _Important notices_ (http://www.schlosserlawfiles.com/CONFIDENTIALITY%20NOTICE%20040606.pdf) _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list _env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us_ (mailto:env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us) _http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity_ (http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity) Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O. Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 707.668.1822 mobile: 498.7847 _http://www.kierassociates.net _ (http://www.kierassociates.net/) GSA Advantage Contractor GS-10F-0124U _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list _env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us_ (mailto:env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us) _http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity_ (http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity) -- _ Important notices_ (http://www.schlosserlawfiles.com/CONFIDENTIALITY%20NOTICE%20040606.pdf) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Wed Mar 30 17:40:58 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 17:40:58 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: News Release: Meetings Scheduled on Proposed Trinity River Restoration Flows Message-ID: <002101cbef3c$4f13b940$ed3b2bc0$@net> As far as I know, water type year has not been determined. The ROD provides for 11,000 cfs in extremely wet water type years. Additionally, neither the TMC nor the Bureau has approved this year's flow schedule. As indicated below, TAMWG will consider this year's flow schedule at its April 12 meeting. Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org From: Geissinger, Steve Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 3:15 PM Subject: News Release: Meetings Scheduled on Proposed Trinity River Restoration Flows All -- The attached news release was sent out today, Wednesday, March 30, 2011. The news release is also included below for those unable to view the PDF attachment. Thank you. - Steve News Release banner_use MS Word Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-11-045 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: March 30, 2011 Proposed Trinity River Restoration High-Flow Releases of Up to 11,000 Cubic Feet Per Second Are Under Consideration The Bureau of Reclamation announced today that two public meetings will be held to discuss upcoming high-flow releases from Lewiston Dam to the Trinity River this spring as part of the Trinity River Restoration Program. High flows typically begin on April 22, reach their peak in May, then gradually decrease to the summer base flow of 450 cubic feet per second (cfs) by late July. Peak releases typically range from 1,500 cfs to 11,000 cfs, depending on the year. One of the proposals to be discussed at the public meetings will be a peak high flow release of 11,000 cfs for up to four days in duration this May. The purpose of the proposed 11,000 cfs release is to interact with recently completed channel rehabilitation projects aimed at restoring salmon and steelhead habitat. To prepare the river for a release of 11,000 cfs, the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) replaced four bridges, 124 wells, and upgraded roads and other infrastructure from 2003 through 2009. The largest release to date as part of TRRP was 10,400 cfs in 2006. The public is invited to attend the meetings on the proposed high-flow release alternatives. The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group will meet on April 12, 2011, at Trinity County Library, 351 Main Street, in Weaverville, California; and the Trinity Management Council will meet on April 13 and April 14, at the Yurok Tribal Office on Hwy 96 in Weicthpec, California. The Trinity Management Council will make a recommendation to Reclamation, which has final authority over flow releases to the Trinity River. Notice of the final flow releases will be issued by Reclamation's Trinity River Division. The public should take appropriate safety precautions whenever river flows are high. A Record of Decision signed by the Secretary of the Interior in December 2000 outlines the plan to implement recovery of the Trinity River and its fish and wildlife populations. Information about the TRRP is available by calling the program's office at 530-623-1800 or visiting the TRRP office, located at 1313 South Main Street in Weaverville. Additional information is available online at http://www.trrp.net/water/index.htm, where there are provisions to subscribe for email notifications of Trinity River flow releases. # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 22654 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MP-11-045 Meetings Scheduled on Proposed Trinity River Restoration Flows.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 25323 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Mar 31 16:56:03 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:56:03 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal March 30 2011 Message-ID: <007001cbefff$334a5700$99df0500$@net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/styles/logo.gif River advocates seek higher intervention BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL Trinity River guides and other river advocates are asking the federal government to take a step back and evaluate recent river restoration efforts which they say are having mixed results. PHIL NELSON |THE TRINITY JOURNAL Trinity River guides and other river advocates are asking the federal government to take a step back and evaluate recent river restoration efforts which they say are having mixed results. A group of Trinity River advocates is urging that Interior Secretary Kenneth Salazar's office take the reins of the Trinity River Restoration Program. The March 21 letter to Salazar is signed by some members of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, the stakeholder advisory group to the Trinity Management Council. Also signing are three members of environmental groups. The writers say that the restoration program has strayed from provisions of the Trinity Record of Decision, casting doubt on the program's success. They ask that the program have direct oversight from the Office of the Secretary, and decisions the Trinity Management Council (with eight member agencies) is unable to make because of the super-majority requirement be decided at that level as well. Among their complaints: . Responsibility has been shunted down to representatives from the Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service who now make final decisions when the management council is unable to do so because of super-majority voting provisions. . The first phase of channel manipulation projects appear to be far greater in scale than was intended by the Record of Decision, and input from scientists on independent review panels so far has not been incorporated into future projects, the letter says. They ask for a pause in projects until evaluation is complete. . One of the principal objectives of the program - a return of about 60 percent of pre-dam populations of wild, anadromous fish - has not been met. The letter states that one of the reasons for this is over-production of hatchery fish. Recommendations for changes in coho hatchery production were not adopted because of the objections of two members of the Trinity Management Council, the letter says. . The Record of Decision made watershed rehabilitation a central component of the program and estimated that $2 million a year for at least 30 years would need to be allocated to rehabilitation of watersheds and tributaries. Tributaries are the principal spawning grounds of coho and steelhead, and watershed degradation is the cause of virtually all sediment into the mainstem. Yet the program has never been allocated more than $500,000 for watershed and tributary rehabilitation. . They praise the performance of the acting executive director, but say the position is an untenable one due to competing objectives and blatant financial conflicts of some of the Trinity Management Council member entities. The letter is signed by six members of the 16-member stakeholder advisory group Arnold Whitridge (the chair), David Steinhauser, Emelia Berol, Richard Lorenz, Dana Hord and Joseph McCarthy; and three members of environmental groups, Carolee Krieger, president of the California Water Impact Network; Byron Leydecker, chair of Friends of Trinity River; and Tom Stokely, a member of the California Advisory Committee on Salmon and Steelhead. Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 21223 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12236 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Mar 31 17:03:30 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:03:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal March 30 2011 Message-ID: <007601cbf000$3cd6fde0$b684f9a0$@net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/styles/logo.gif Guides express concern over river projects BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL Calls are increasing for a suspension of earth and gravel moving projects along the Trinity River meant to improve fish habitat. The Trinity River Guide Association has requested a moratorium on these projects until further information is available and shared with the public. "We feel they should go back and study what worked, what didn't work, what benefited the river, what didn't benefit the river," said Liam Gogan of Douglas City, president of the guide association. He stressed, that the association "is not anti-restoration at all." Trinity River Restoration Program projects along the river have included re-contouring of river banks and development of side channels to increase the amount of shallow, low water velocity areas for salmonid fry rearing. Spawning gravel and cobble have also been added. Along with higher flows called for in the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision, the projects are intended to help bring back, on a smaller scale, features the river had prior to construction of Trinity Dam. In all, the restoration program plans 47 projects on the Trinity River between Lewiston Dam and the North Fork at Helena, about half of which have been completed. The guide association believes these mechanical projects may be trying to create fish rearing habitat at the expense of adult fish. Gogan said all the projects are a concern, but to mention one, "the Sawmill Project (from 2009) in the upper river in Lewiston - we feel there was too much gravel put in that site," Gogan said. "It just kind of filled in that hole there. They were putting it in faster than the river could disperse it." >From the restoration program, interim Executive Director Jennifer Faler said, "We agree that the pool was impacted by our high-flow gravel operations, and we're monitoring that and are hopeful this year's flow releases will help to clear out that pool." The guide association's letter, which went to agencies, lawmakers and tribes, says, "Based on tens of thousands of hours of personal observations on the river we believe that the aggressive mainstem channel projects over the past few seasons may have adversely impacted adult fish holding habitat upstream of the North Fork and have resulted in excessive sedimentation in the river." The letter continues, "It is apparent that excessive - and often ill-timed - amounts of earth moving, combined with the placement of large amounts of spawning gravel and a lack of high flow releases has filled in many of the pools where adult spring Chinook, summer steelhead, and other species hold over during the summer months." "Under the (Record of Decision) they're supposed to pause and go back and study the effectiveness," Gogan said. During the suspension of work on the mainstem that they seek, the guides suggest that restoration funds be put toward work in the watershed and in tributaries that wild fish use. The guides' request has support from some members of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, the stakeholder group that advises the Trinity Management Council. Arnold Whitridge, chairman of the advisory group, said members will discuss the issues brought up in the letter at the group's April 12 meeting. Whitridge said he has not formed an opinion as to whether the projects are causing harm, but "I support a review because I don't think anyone knows for sure what all the effects are." He noted the one project proposed for this year is relatively small. The Wheel Gulch project would entail a side channel and bank reforming about three miles downstream from Douglas City. "It's not a complete pause," Whitridge said. "A dramatic reduction is taking place this year while review goes on." Whitridge is one of six of the 16-member advisory group to sign a letter to Interior Secretary Kenneth Salazar that voices concerns about the direction of the restoration program. Among those concerns, the signers of the letter to Salazar state that channel manipulation projects constructed in the first phase of the program appear to be in far greater scale than intended in the Record of Decision. Pre-project reviews were not done until recently, the letter to Salazar says, and resulting suggestions by an independent science panel have not been incorporated in proposed projects at this point. Like the fishing guides, signers of the letter to Salazar request a pause in channel construction projects to allow time to review what has been done. >From the restoration program, Faler said the Trinity Management Council, which has representatives from eight member agencies, did consider a suspension of projects last September. The decision was to continue, she said, but to involve the public and stakeholders more in the second phase of planning - "do more outreach in the design process." "The program is receiving valuable input from a variety of stakeholders and our own science and monitoring projects," Faler said, "and I expect we'll be able to find a path forward that will accommodate the concerns being raised." She said one adjustment that may be made is a higher peak release from Trinity Dam than normal in April. Faler said a release of 11,000 cubic feet per second is being considered to see if the projects function as expected with more water. Adjustments would be made to the rest of the dam release schedule, and the overall amount allotted to the river for the year would not be changed, she said. >From the guides association, Gogan said a higher release could allow the public to see for itself if the projects are working as intended. Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 21223 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Thu Mar 31 17:10:47 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:10:47 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Letter to Secretary Salazar Message-ID: <003401cbf001$41974fa0$c4c5eee0$@net> Letter to Secretary Salazar together with Table of Contents for binder information provided him. Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Salazar Letter 3 21 2011.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 56793 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Salazar Binder Table of Contents.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 20954 bytes Desc: not available URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Fri Apr 1 14:49:42 2011 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:49:42 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Wheel Gulch Final EA available and signed FONSI In-Reply-To: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A67BC1CD3@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> References: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A67BC1CD3@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A6A192B38@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Dear Interested Parties - The public review period for the Wheel Gulch Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) ended on March 17. No written comments were received concerning this down-river project, however, a couple of questions from our February public meeting were answered in the "Public Involvement" section of the final EA/IS. The FINAL Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site: Trinity River Mile 75.8 to 76.4 EA/IS and signed Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) are located at: http://www.trrp.net/implementation/WheelGulchEA.htm The Wheel Gulch Project is scheduled for implementation in summer 2011. Sincerely, Brandt Gutermuth Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net From: Gutermuth, F. Brandt Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 11:27 AM Subject: Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site Environmental document available for public review thorough March 17, 2011 Dear Agency Reviewers and Interested Parties- The Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site: Trinity River Mile 75.8 to 76.4 Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) is available for review. The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) of the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Bureau of Land Management (federal co-lead agencies), the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board - state lead agency), and the Trinity County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD - state cooperating agency), are working together to inform the public about this proposed project. The Project EA/IS, which meets California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements, is available for public review and comment through March 17, 2011. In an effort to conserve resources, we have chosen to print few of these in hard copy. The Wheel Gulch EA/IS (and the Master Environmental Impact Report - Programmatic environmental review document for TRRP proposed channel rehabilitation and sediment management actions), which explains and analyzes environmental impacts of the project, is available on the TRRP website: http://www.trrp.net/implementation/WheelGulchEA.htm or on Reclamation's Mid-Pacific website at: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_base.cfm?location=ncao . The EA/IS may be reviewed in hard copy in Weaverville at: 1) the Trinity County library at 211 Main Street, 2) the TRRP office at 1313 S Main Street (by Top's Grocery), or 3) the TCRCD at Horseshoe square (on HWY 3). In Redding the EA/IS may be reviewed at the Bureau of Land Management office at 355 Hemsted Lane. The Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Project is located on the mainstem Trinity River approximately 3 miles downstream of Junction City. The project will work to increase salmon and steelhead habitat downstream of Lewiston Dam, as described in the December 19, 2000, Record of Decision for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Environmental Impact Statement. The Project is planned to enhance aquatic habitat quality and complexity via construction of slow water refuge habitats, placement of structures (e.g., large woody debris), and introduction of gravel into the river's floodplain. In 2009, the Regional Water Board acted as lead agency for a Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) and site specific Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Report (EA/EIR) (State Clearinghouse number 2008032110) for channel rehabilitation and sediment management activities for the remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 sites in order to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Regional Water Board certified the environmental documents on August 25, 2009 (WDID No. 1A09062WNTR). Under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15177, after a Master EIR has been prepared and certified, subsequent projects which the lead agency determines as being within the scope of the Master EIR will be subject to only limited environmental review. The preparation of a new environmental document and new written findings will not be required if, based on a review of the initial study (IS) prepared for the subsequent project (e.g., the Wheel Gulch EA/IS), the lead agency determines, on the basis of written findings, that no additional significant environmental effect will result from the proposal, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives may be required, and that the project is within the scope of the Master EIR. The Wheel Gulch Rehabilitation Site EA/IS contains project specific information required to apply for enrollment under the General Permit R1-2010-0028 for Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation activities which the Regional Water Board will consider in making its determination and approval decision. If you would like to receive a copy of the EA/IS on a cd, please contact Mr. Alex Cousins, TCRCD, at 623-6004, or Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, Bureau of Reclamation, at 623-1806. A limited number of hard copies are also available. Comments may be sent to: Mr. Alex Cousins, Trinity County RCD, P.O. Box 1450, Weaverville, Ca 96093 or e-mail acousins at tcrcd.net or Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093, or e-mail bgutermuth at mp.usbr.gov. Best Regards- Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From awhitridge at snowcrest.net Mon Apr 4 10:46:17 2011 From: awhitridge at snowcrest.net (Arnold Whitridge) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 10:46:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG agenda for April 12 Message-ID: <73005DCB28074C1DB413A3148E315303@arnPC> Trinity River minders, Here's the agenda for the April 12 meeting of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group. TAMWG meetings are open to reasonable members of the public. Arnold Whitridge, TAMWG chair 530 623-6688 Proposed Agenda TRINITY ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP Tuesday, April 12, 2011 Trinity County Library, 351 Main Street, Weaverville, CA Time Presentation, Discussion, and/or Action on: Presenter 1. 9:30 Adopt agenda; approve December minutes 2. 9:40 Open forum; public comment 3. 9:50 Designated Federal Officer topics Randy Brown new charter; membership update; by-laws 4. 10:10 TMC Chair report Brian Person 5. 10:40 2011 Flow release schedule Andreas Krause 12:30 lunch 6. 1:30 Channel rehabilitation policies Jennifer Faler 7. 3:00 TRRP performance measures Ernie Clarke, Nina Hemphill 8. 4:00 Acting Executive Director's report Jennifer Faler 9. 4:30 Annual election of TAMWG chair and vice-chair 10. 4:40 Agenda topics for May 17-18 TAMWG meeting 5:00 Adjourn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Draft TAMWG Agenda April 2011.doc Type: application/msword Size: 32256 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri Apr 15 15:10:17 2011 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:10:17 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Improved Sacramento River Chinook Allow First Major California, Oregon Ocean Fishery Since 2007 Message-ID: <20110415141026.2C49658B@m0004615.ppops.net> THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com April 15, 2011 - Issue No. 571 * Improved Sacramento River Chinook Allow First Major California, Oregon Ocean Fishery Since 2007 The Pacific Fishery Management Council on Wednesday adopted a set of ocean salmon seasons that it says provides recreational and commercial opportunities up and down the West Coast while still achieving conservation goals for a multitude of individual salmon stocks and providing for escapement for freshwater fisheries. The recommendation will be forwarded to the National Marine Fisheries Service for approval by May 1. "We are pleased to see that Sacramento River fall chinook salmon have rebounded nicely for California and Oregon fisheries, and we will continue to enjoy good salmon opportunities off the Washington coast this summer," said Council Chairman Mark Cedergreen. --North of Cape Falcon Washington and northern Oregon fisheries north of Cape Falcon (near Manzanita in northern Oregon) depend largely on Columbia River stocks. Columbia River fall chinook returns in 2010 were above average, and 2011 forecasts are similar. Columbia River hatchery coho returns are below average and less than 2010 returns, but Washington coastal and Puget Sound stocks are above average. North of Cape Falcon, there is an overall non-Indian total allowable catch of 64,600 chinook and 80,000 marked hatchery coho. A mark-selective recreational chinook season north of Cape Falcon begins June 18 and ends June 25 or when 4,800 marked chinook have been caught. The chinook season will be open seven days per week, two fish per day, with a 24-inch total length minimum size limit. All salmon seasons north of Falcon are divided into four sub-areas. Seasons begin June 26 and end in mid- to late-September. For details, please see the season descriptions on the Council website at www.pcouncil.org Non-Indian ocean commercial fisheries north of Cape Falcon include traditional chinook seasons in the May-June timeframe and all-salmon seasons in the July-to-September timeframe. The chinook quota of 30,900 is lower than the 2010 quota of 56,000. The coho quota of 12,800 is similar to 2010's quota of 11,800. Tribal ocean fisheries north of Cape Falcon are similar to recent years, although chinook quotas are lower than in 2010. -- California and Oregon South of Cape Falcon Greatly improved abundance of Sacramento River fall chinook will fuel the first substantial ocean salmon fisheries off California and Oregon since 2007. Fisheries south of Cape Falcon are supported by Sacramento River fall chinook. In 2008 and 2009, poor Sacramento returns led to the largest ocean salmon fishery closure on record. The abundance forecast of Sacramento River fall chinook in 2011 is 730,000, far above the number needed for optimum spawning this fall (122,000-180,000 fish). The Klamath River fall chinook forecast for 2011 is near normal. The Oregon Coast natural coho forecast in 2011 is about 250,000, well above the 15 year average. Recreational fisheries in southern Oregon and California are for chinook only and run from May 14 through Labor Day weekend in the Brookings/Eureka/Crescent City area, and from April 2 to Oct. 30 or Sept. 18 in areas further south. The minimum size limit will be 24 inches for chinook coastwide. Recreational fisheries in central Oregon will allow chinook retention and run from March 15 through Sept. 30. Coho fisheries consist of a mark-selective coho quota fishery that will open in early July and a non‐mark selective coho quota fishery in early September. Commercial fisheries from Cape Falcon to Humbug Mountain., Ore., will be open from April 15 through July 9, July 17 through Aug. 31, and during the month of October. Humbug Mountain is located about six miles south of Port Orford. Fisheries in the Humbug Mountain to California border area will be open in May, June, July, and August, with chinook quotas in June (1,500), July (1,200), and August (1,000). Fisheries from the California border to Humboldt South Jetty will be open July 2‐20 with a 1,400 chinook quota and August 1-15 with a 1,000 chinook quota. Between Horse Mountain and Point Arena (in the Fort Bragg area), commercial chinook salmon fisheries will be open July 23-27, July 29-August 29, and Sept. 1-30, seven days per week. In the area from Point Arena to Point Sur (Monterey), the season will be open May 1-31; June 25-July 5; July 9-27 (Saturday to Wednesday); July 29-Aug. 29; and during the entire month of September. From Point Sur to the Mexico border, the chinook season will be open as above, plus June 1-24 but closed in September. There will also be a season from Point Reyes to Point San Pedro, open Monday to Friday October 3-14. The Council developed the management measures after several weeks spent reviewing three season alternatives. The review process included input by federal and state fishery scientists and fishing industry members; public testimony, and three public hearings in coastal communities. The Council received additional scientific information and took public testimony before taking final action. In addition, the coastal states will decide on compatible freshwater fishery regulations at their respective commission hearings. PFMC is one of eight regional fishery management councils established by the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 for the purpose of managing fisheries miles offshore of the U.S. coastline. The Pacific Council recommends management measures for fisheries off the coasts of California, Oregon and Washington. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Fri Apr 15 14:55:59 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:55:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Improved Sacramento River Chinook Allow First Major California, Oregon Ocean Fishery Since 2007 In-Reply-To: <20110415141026.2C49658B@m0004615.ppops.net> References: <20110415141026.2C49658B@m0004615.ppops.net> Message-ID: <20110415215608.RHBV25530.omta02.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bwl3 at comcast.net Sun Apr 17 15:04:10 2011 From: bwl3 at comcast.net (Byron Leydecker) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 15:04:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TMC recommended Trinity River High Flow Releases Message-ID: <008201cbfd4b$62166340$264329c0$@net> Hello everyone, The official water year designation for the Trinity River is "wet." The water allocation for restoration related flow releases associated with a wet water year is 701,000 acre-feet. The high flow release schedule for the Trinity River as recommended by the Trinity Management Council (TMC) is as follows: the flow releases will begin increasing on April 22, 2011, reaching a peak release of 11,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) on May 4. These peak flows will be held for a period of 3 days, and then decreased to 4,500 cfs by May 9. After that date, releases will be gradually decreased to a 450 cfs summer base-flow by August 1. A daily flow schedule is attached. The Bureau of Reclamation, who has final authority over the flow releases, is currently considering the TMC recommended releases and is expected to make a determination early next week. The public should take appropriate safety precautions whenever river flows are high. Landowners are advised to clear personal items and debris from the floodplain prior to the releases. Andreas Krause Trinity River Restoration Program Phone: 530-623-1800 Email: akrause at usbr.gov Website: www.trrp.net Byron Leydecker Chair, Friends of Trinity River PO Box 2327 Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327 415 383 4810 land 415 519 4810 mobile bwl3 at comcast.net bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary) http://www.fotr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2011_Trinity_Flows.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 108894 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Apr 17 19:27:05 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 19:27:05 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Letter to Editor- 'Junk Science...' Message-ID: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-04-13/Opinion/Junk_science_on_Trinity_flows.html ?Junk science? on Trinity flows FROM TOM RODGERS WEAVERVILLE Last week?s (April 6) front page article entitled ?11,000 cfs release to Trinity River proposed? caught my eye. Wait a minute, a release of that size was proposed for an extremely wet year such as 2006 when I personnally measured just over 60 inches of precipitation. As I read the article, it smacked of propaganda. Going on and on about historic flows. Stating winter flows exceeded this amount 60 out of every 100 years and spring flows exceeding the same amount 12 out of every 100 years. Oh really! How the heck did they measure these flows with no dams to regulate and measure them.? I say, ?junk science!? Very similar to the Blue Ribbon Task Force the ?Govenator? appointed last year to the Marine Life Protection Act to overide the decisions made by a state-mandated group of fishermen, scientists, enviromental groups and business stakeholders. For more on this, hop on your computer and pull up ?Partnership for Sustainable Oceans.? Do these bureau scientists and TRRP, ?dedicated to preserving fish,? ever consider the impact they are creating on the bass fishery in Trinity Lake. Those fish are building nests and spawning this time of year and here comes the bureau and TRRP dropping the lake level, exposing those spawns, killing off untold numbers (thousands) of bass roe (eggs). Not to mention the monetary impact on the marinas and commercial campgrounds on Trinity Lake due to low lake levels. Real good for tourism. Go figure. Looks to me like these guys are going to do as they please, regardless of the fact that this is only a ?normal? water year. ?Dam the torpedos, full speed ahead.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Mon Apr 18 12:05:45 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:05:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Letter to Editor- 'Junk Science...' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: LMFAO! 2011/4/17 Tom Stokely > > http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-04-13/Opinion/Junk_science_on_Trinity_flows.html > > > ?Junk science? on Trinity flows > FROM TOM RODGERS WEAVERVILLE > > Last week?s (April 6) front page article entitled ?11,000 cfs release to > Trinity River proposed? caught my eye. Wait a minute, a release of that size > was proposed for an extremely wet year such as 2006 when I personnally > measured just over 60 inches of precipitation. > > As I read the article, it smacked of propaganda. Going on and on about > historic flows. Stating winter flows exceeded this amount 60 out of every > 100 years and spring flows exceeding the same amount 12 out of every 100 > years. Oh really! How the heck did they measure these flows with no dams to > regulate and measure them.? > > I say, ?junk science!? Very similar to the Blue Ribbon Task Force the > ?Govenator? appointed last year to the Marine Life Protection Act to overide > the decisions made by a state-mandated group of fishermen, scientists, > enviromental groups and business stakeholders. For more on this, hop on your > computer and pull up ?Partnership for Sustainable Oceans.? > > Do these bureau scientists and TRRP, ?dedicated to preserving fish,? ever > consider the impact they are creating on the bass fishery in Trinity Lake. > Those fish are building nests and spawning this time of year and here comes > the bureau and TRRP dropping the lake level, exposing those spawns, killing > off untold numbers (thousands) of bass roe (eggs). Not to mention the > monetary impact on the marinas and commercial campgrounds on Trinity Lake > due to low lake levels. Real good for tourism. Go figure. > > Looks to me like these guys are going to do as they please, regardless of > the fact that this is only a ?normal? water year. ?Dam the torpedos, full > speed ahead.? > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -- "A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. The true value of a human being is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive." ~ Albert Einstein, 1954 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: laughing-emoticon-vector.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 79645 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AwJeez.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 91374 bytes Desc: not available URL: From PManza at usbr.gov Tue Apr 19 14:06:16 2011 From: PManza at usbr.gov (Manza, Peggy L) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:06:16 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Lewiston Release Changes Message-ID: Please make the following release changes at Lewiston Dam: Date time from (cfs) to (cfs) 4-21-11 2300 300 400 4-22-11 0100 400 500 4-27-11 2100 500 750 4-27-11 2300 750 1,000 4-28-11 0100 1,000 1,250 4-28-11 0300 1,250 1,500 4-30-11 2100 1,500 1,750 4-30-11 2300 1,750 2,000 5-1-11 0100 2,000 2,500 5-1-11 0300 2,500 3,000 5-1-11 0500 3,000 3,500 5-1-11 0700 3,500 4,000 5-1-11 0900 4,000 4,500 5-1-11 2300 4,500 5,500 5-2-11 0100 5,500 6,500 5-2-11 0300 6,500 7,500 5-2-11 0500 7,500 8,000 5-2-11 2300 8,000 9,000 5-3-11 0100 9,000 10,000 5-4-11 0100 10,000 11,000 Ordered by: Peggy Manza Note: Trinity ROD spring pulse flow ramp up schedule -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 20 15:43:34 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:43:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Farewell Robert Franklin Message-ID: <148D46EF-8237-4812-9F51-1E54428786B5@att.net> Farewell Robert Franklin http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/03/farewell-robert-franklin/ Robert Franklin. / Photo courtesy of Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Dept. 20 Years of Service to the Hoopa Valley Tribe Press Release / Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Department He grew up in Hoopa, almost literally. For over 20 years Robert Franklin worked for the Hoopa Valley Tribe as a hydrologist for the Fisheries Department. ?It was so much more than just a job,? he said. ?I feel like I grew into adulthood here.? He will visit the Trinity River again to visit, but his professional work on its waters will end March 25 when he closes the door to his office. Destination: Sauk Suiattle territory, a one hour drive northeast of Seattle, Washington. Washington state is another stop on Franklin?s gradual migration north. Born and raised in the Los Angeles area, Franklin moved to the North Coast to attend College of the Redwoods. From there he transferred to Humboldt State University where he changed his major as often as rock stars change hairstyles. He settled on a bachelor?s degree in Fisheries and went on to earn a Master?s degree in natural resources watershed management. His first brush with Hoopa was in August of 1978. A Eureka resident at the time, Franklin asked some friends which rivers in the area offer the best fishing opportunities. The Trinity was named, but the Eurekans advised against visiting the reservation labeling it a ?dangerous? place. Despite their warning, Franklin found himself on the bank of the Trinity River, fishing rod in hand. Just after putting in below the Highway 96 bridge, the river took him around a bend and his eyes were drawn to three young men waving their hands obviously tying to gain his attention. ?The guys didn?t seem angry, but they clearly wanted me to pull the boat over. So I did,? Franklin said. Franklin happened to be canoeing down the Trinity River during the Jump Dance, a Hoopa world renewal ceremony, and the young men merely saw him and wanted to invite him for dinner. ?I?ve only experienced that kind of welcoming one other time in my life,? he said. ?It was a special experience, being welcomed and joining the Hoopa people for dinner during a sacred time. There is a generosity here. Many people are extremely generous in ways that are very personal and important.? Fast forward to August of 1989. After earning his master?s degree and six months of phone calls to the Hoopa Tribe, Franklin was hired by the Fisheries Department as a hydrologist. He was instrumental during the decades it took to develop the Trinity River Flow Evaluation, which led to the reallocation of Trinity River water back into the Trinity River under the 2000 Record of Decision. ?Robert has truly been an invaluable asset to our Department,? Fisheries Director, Mike Orcutt said. ?Robert?s efforts in the Tribe?s long term efforts to restore the Trinity River are truly priceless and his zeal and personal commitment to the Tribe will be hard to replace. I wish him well in his future endeavors. He will always have a place in my boat when he returns to visit the area.? Franklin, an avid recreational fisherman is sad to leave the jewel he has helped protect and restore for the past 20 years, the Trinity River, but thrilled to continue service for west coast tribal nations. And, his new home is a fisherman?s paradise. ?There?s so much water up there. My son and I can probably go on a fishing adventure every weekend for at least two years at a new site each time,? he said. He won?t be fishing the entire time. His new job is to manage the Sauk Suiattle Tribe?s Fisheries Program, a department in the early stages of development by the small tribe of 200 members. ?The highlight of my time in Hoopa was the people,? Franklin said. ?I love that there are so many people gathered together with so much love for the land, rivers, mountains and nature. There are many people I admire here and many people I will miss greatly.? ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1712robertfranklin.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 48389 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 20 15:49:06 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:49:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Hoopa=92s_Commercial_Fishing_Contr?= =?windows-1252?q?oversy_Continues?= Message-ID: <8082B1A7-0F6E-49A5-A879-243FADA0D3FD@att.net> Hoopa?s Commercial Fishing Controversy Continues http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/04/hoopas-commercial-fishing-controversy-continues/ By Kay Heitkamp / Two Rivers Tribune Hoopa Tribal Council Vice-Chairman, Byron Nelson Jr., is speaking out about a controversy that continues to escalate ? should commercial fishing be allowed? Is it or is it not legal? ?It just seems to me the tribal membership is not that well informed about everything that?s been going on,? said Nelson. ?I?m coming to the newspaper ? it?s one of the best ways for that to happen. Facebook too ? you can read the discussions that are going on between tribal members. So many of them are totally in the dark. They?re frustrated and angry.? Hoopa Valley Tribal Council Vice-Chairman, Byron Nelson Jr. / Photo courtesy of B. Nelson. Nelson feels that speaking out may be a way to bring some transparency to recent events. ?That?s why I?m speaking out ? because of what happened in Tribal Council chambers earlier this week,? he said. ?We had a meeting on March 28, a working session. Everyone was there. I don?t consider a working session to be a closed session, although I guess some members do.? Council members brought up the whole issue of the commercial fishing controversy. The Tribal Council called long-time tribal attorney, Tom Schlosser, for a conference call to give his opinion. Schlosser gave his legal opinion that portions of Title 16, the Fishing Ordinance codified in the Hoopa Valley Tribal Code, adopted in 1976 and amended in 1986 that banned the sale of any fishery resource according to Section 11(a) no longer apply. His interpretation is that this is because the 1989 Commercial Fishing Referendum Measure that does allow commercial fishing supersedes Title 16 and does allow the taking of fish for subsistence, ceremonies, or commercial sales. According to several dictionaries, supersede means to replace, take the place of, set aside, overrule, annul, or repeal. The attorney based his interpretation on his belief that the 1989 referendum has two parts that operate separately. It is his opinion that one part is the question whether the ban on commercial fishing should be discontinued. The second part asks whether the Tribal Council should develop an ordinance to regulate a commercial fishery on the Hoopa Valley Reservation. Schlosser said approval of the referendum discontinued the prohibition on commercial fishing whether or not the council formulates an ordinance. Nelson was on the tribal council when the referendum was developed. ?The whole idea behind the referendum was the tribal government would set it up so the entire tribal community would share. The title of the referendum clearly stated, tribally operated commercial fishery,? Nelson said. ?That would have prevented individuals from going out and profiting. That?s what the people thought they were voting for.? The referendum passed. Voter turnout was poor ? the vote was 152 ? 100. Schlosser countered by saying that maybe the specific wording contained in the actual referendum wasn?t on the ballot, but it was in the text ? legalese, according to Nelson, that the community would not necessarily have had access to. Schlosser also said Hoopa?s constitution provides for continuous operation (if there is no mention of a specific time frame) of rules and regulations ? in this case, the 1989 referendum. This raises another question. ?Why, in 1991, did the council authorize a special seasonal regulation to allow a commercial fishery for fall Chinook for just a three-month period?? asked Nelson. ?Why did the council need to create a special provision to open up, just for one season, a commercial fishery if the 1989 referendum allowing commercial fishing was continuous?? When asked if he knew who called Schlosser to give his interpretation during the meeting, Nelson said, if he had to guess, the person who?s been in touch with the attorney most frequently for the last 20 years, sometimes on a daily basis ? the Self-Governance Coordinator, Danny Jordan. ?He?s the person who has the most to gain from Schlosser?s interpretation that Title 16 is superseded by the 1989 referendum,? said Nelson. At the special Tribal Council meeting held later in the afternoon, Nelson made a motion that until such time a clear and concise fishing ordinance is agreed upon and adopted by the tribal council, a moratorium should be placed on commercial fishing on the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation. ?I feel the whole process is moving along so quickly that people aren?t getting the chance to speak out or learn what?s been going on,? said Nelson. ?The Fish Commission already held it?s last public meeting. That?s why we need a moratorium to give the council, the commission and the community the time to sort everything out and see how we want to manage our fish resource.? The vote went around the table. Marcellene Norton, Byron Nelson, and Oscar Billings voted for the moratorium. Ryan Jackson, Leroy Jackson, and Joe LeMieux voted against it. ?The tie was broken by Chairman Masten who voted against the moratorium,? said Nelson. ?This is the first time the council has had to say where each member stands on commercial fishing.? Nelson had a feeling his request wouldn?t pass, but he wanted to get it on record. The chairman asked if he wanted the vote to be held in closed executive session and he said, ?No,? because he knew it could be killed and could just disappear. He wanted it on record in open session. Before the Tribal Council meeting was over, the council insisted that Schlosser put in writing what he talked about during the conference call. The attorney sent a memorandum via electronic mail on the firm?s letterhead. Nelson feels that the council had Schlosser give his interpretation to cover all the bases. After speaking out about what went on at the meeting, the vice-chairman said the 1989 referendum called for an ordinance to be developed to manage commercial fishing. However, there are no such ordinances. Nelson said over the years, separate ordinances have been passed for different resources, but there is not an ordinance in support of commercial fishing. ?It all needs to be pulled together,? said Nelson. ?That?s what I?ve been advocating. It?s our codes and ordinances and even our constitution that need to be brought into modern times in terms of being able to run a tribal government effectively.? Nelson thinks sentiments have changed in the years since the referendum. He feels it should go back to the people to decided whether they want commercial fishing or not. ?There?s nothing wrong with doing that. That?s what we should do ? revisit it. I think the vote would go against allowing commercial fishing,? said Nelson. ?There seems to be a lot of sentiment out there against commercial fishing and there are some good reasons for that,? Nelson said. ?One is cultural tradition ? fishing is tied to our dances.? He talked about the direct connections between fisheries and the dances. ?When you dance, you pray for abundance. I do that myself when I dance,? Nelson said. ?How can you justify exploitation of our source of food when you pray for an abundance? Praying for an abundance, yet allowing a few individuals to make a lot of money from that abundance ? that?s sacrilegious.? The vice-chairman said this is what keeps coming to his mind. He is adamant in his belief that sales to outside interests will take precedence over cultural and tribal interests. ?This capitalistic approach is not what our culture is about,? Nelson said. ?I really feel that we as a tribe have been fighting, trying to retain our culture, ever since non-Indians came to this valley, and we?ve done a good job. We still retain our dances, our morality. Some basic old thoughts have kept things together. I think we have to fight even harder now to try to retain our cultural integrity by including our rights and traditions in our laws.? He feels the tribe needs to develop a resource management ordinance that covers all resources including fish, acorns, mushrooms, and timber because everything the tribe has is a resource. The Fish Commission is responsible for making recommendations to the Tribal Council which, in turn, is responsible for creating an ordinance to enforce the tribally-operated commercial fishery referred to in the 1989 referendum and submitting it through the LPA process. . Nelson?s opinion is that some council members are making it really hard for the Fish Commission to continue their work. He said after a great deal of effort, the commission printed surveys to find out from tribal community members what they want in a commercial fishing ordinance. Evidently, the chairman has questioned the money needed for postage to send them out and the surveys are still just setting there. ?A certain few tribal members already have it in their mind they want commercial fishing for individuals,? said Nelson. ?Most people don?t realize just how much money is involved. In the gorge, an individual can easily catch 100 salmon a night. He did the math. At an average weight of 20 pounds per fish selling at $3 a pound in Eureka or $6 a pound if you drive on up the coast ? that?s either $6,000 or $12,000 a night. Nelson said the people who want commercial fishing keep saying if we don?t use the tribal allocation of about 7,000 fish, they?ll be given to other tribes. He says it?s a scare tactic. The vice-chairman said, ?If there?s any chance of losing our fishing rights because we don?t take the allocation, then I say take it and get the salmon back into our traditional diets. We?ve had fish in our diets for thousands of years and it?s ingrained into our physical makeup. That?s who we are as a people. It?s healthy food.? Nelson went on to say he thinks the tribe should develop a system to reintroduce fish back into peoples? lives. ?The system should be part of an ordinance that covers ways to distribute fish to the community so we can provide for our elders and bring fish into the schools for our kids. We could even have a tribal smokehouse. There?s ways to use the allocation for all the tribe collectively rather than selling it for top dollar to the outside so plush restaurants benefit from our resource.? Nelson said towards the end of the meeting, a request was made for a motion to adjourn. He spoke up and said before adjourning, there was one more thing he wanted to say. ?I believe our attorneys are tainted over this fishing issue and that they?ve been tainted by key persons within our own tribal government.? Now that the 1989 referendum is law, the tribal council needs to draft a commercial fishing ordinance. Then it will have to go through the lengthy LPA process. Delays in the process of developing an ordinance will benefit those who can continue to exploit commercial fishing for their own gain. ?People stand to make a great deal of money, especially during the fall. The ones who benefit from no regulations are the ones who are profiteering,? said Nelson. ?The potential for trouble is possible, even probable. That can lead to violence, more than we?ve had in the past.. Asked if there?s any recourse to Schlosser?s action, Nelson said a group of tribal members are trying to get a measure on the ballot for the June election. ?It?s a lot of work ? they?ll need hundreds of signatures in a short length of time,? said Nelson. ?It?s too late for the spring run, but a vote to support a ban on commercial fishing in June could save the fall run from exploitation. It would be close.? Another option would be for a tribal member to take the issue to court. According to Nelson, the tribe has many well-educated, intelligent members who don?t agree with allowing commercial fishing. A lawsuit could be filed by a tribal member whose standing to bring a lawsuit could be a claim that he is being injured by the profiteering of a few individuals who are taking and using a tribal resource for their own use. ?If that happens, the court could issue an order to prevent fishing until the case is decided,? said Nelson. ?If this goes to court, I think Schlosser?s opinion is flawed and he would be ruled against. Having been a judge, I don?t think some of his interpretations would stand up in court because his assumptions are too vague.? ?If the majority of tribal members want it, I would be for tribally-operated commercial fishing, even though my own personal feeling is when you pray for the salmon and then allow for a profit to be made from them ? it seems hypocritical,? said Nelson. Attempts to contact opposing Hoopa Tribal Council members were not successful, as there were no responses before press time. Watch for follow-up and continuing coverage in future issues of the Two Rivers Tribune. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1714byronnelsonjr.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20462 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 20 17:07:32 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:07:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Cultural Fish Commissioners Could Be Reinstated Message-ID: <02345CEC-94E0-48E8-A10E-85601B88C727@att.net> Cultural Fish Commissioners Could Be Reinstated http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/04/cultural-fish-commissioners-could-be-reinstated/ By ALLIE HOSTLER, Two Rivers Tribune It?s too early to tell what the recommended commercial fishing regulations might look like when presented to the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council on May 24, 2011 by the Fish Commission. But, the foundation of the regulation will shape up over the next several weeks with each commissioner assigned to write specific sections such as seasons, gear, enforcement, conservation, and penalties, etc. At the Commission?s April 12, meeting Tribal Attorney, Gene Burke reported on a miscommunication regarding the March 28 Council motion to separate cultural commissioners from fish commissioners, which passed and effectively reduced cultural representatives? input to advisory only. Councilman Joseph LeMeiux voted in favor of the motion, but later changed his mind. ?Joe LeMeiux said he never intended to disqualify voting membership from the cultural members of the Commission,? Burke said. ?We need to make renewed contact with those particular commission members noting that wasn?t the intent of the motion.? The motion was intended to address a potential nepotism issue on the Fish Commission?two members are father and son, one being a cultural member and the other a tribal fisherman. Hoopa Tribal member, Rhonda Jones-O?Neill, who attends many of the Fish Commission meetings said, ?Both commissioners were appointed by the Council. The issue of nepotism should have been dealt with and clarified months ago.? Ending the discussion, Burke said he would take the issue back to the Council for further direction. After the commissioners settled on the logistics of compiling each of their sections, the discussion quickly moved to gear. Commissioner Ken Norton explained that the gear section is a rough draft and is subject to discussion and revision as are all sections during the drafting phase. The gear section could limit the number and placement of gill nets used in the gorge area for commercial purposes?two nets per tribal member, not to exceed 50 feet in length each with mesh between 7-9 inches. And, in the draft, it?s suggested that nets be placed at least 50 feet apart. A more in-depth discussion about regulating the gorge area will occur at the next Fish Commission meeting on April 19. Next up?enforcement. Commissioner Norvin Hostler presented a one-paragraph section on enforcement with the penalties section to come next week. In short, the Hoopa Valley Department of Public Safety will be responsible to enforce the commercial regulations as well as the existing Fishing Ordinance, with the Tribal Court retaining jurisdiction over any and all cases that may result. Recognizing that actual enforcement of tribal codes is a concern of the Tribal membership, the commission decided they will make a strong recommendation to the Tribal Council that law enforcement be held accountable and responsible for their actions or lack of action. Board Chairwoman, Lois Risling said there were written comments from Tribal members requesting the right to sue individuals for failing to enforce the regulations, and the ability to file a civil suit against fellow Tribal members if there was evidence they broke the law. ?That won?t solve the problem,? Commissioner Stanley Ferris Jr. said. ?The Council just needs to put the pressure on law enforcement to get them to do their job. They take an oath to uphold our laws, why aren?t they?? Risling also reiterated comments from the membership that echoed a controversial sentiment?those in public trust or policy making positions such as the director of the Fisheries Department, the Department of Commerce, the Tribal Council and Law Enforcement should be prohibited from commercial fishing. Some members of the commission believe strongly that such a clause would be a deal breaker for the entire regulation, others think a conflict of interest clause is appropriate and that the topic should be further discussed in the ?eligibility? section of the draft regulations. Next, Risling presented her assigned section ?general,? which details the authority, vision, purpose, findings, goals and declaration. Written in an unusual form and sprinkled with traditional Hupa words, her section was controversial, some calling it wordy and cultural. Others thought it was appropriate and should be how all Hoopa laws start out. ?This sets the tone for what we are doing here,? Risling said. ?Our current laws are causing conflicts. We need to bring in a more traditional form of law. We?ve been losing a lot of cases and I think the reason is we?re starting our arguments with the establishment of the reservation and the Record of Decision. That is not where Hoopa begins.? Jones-O?Neill stepped in and said, ?I hope you all consider Councilman Byron Nelson?s comment that traditional Hupa law supercedes any law.? Councilwoman Marcellene Norton said, ?There?s been a lot of discussion about tradition, we cannot ignore that.? The Fish Commission plans to address some of the following sections of the draft regulation at their upcoming meeting on Tuesday, April 19 at 7PM in the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council Chambers: jurisdiction; ceremonial fishing; buyers; penalties; definitions; the gorge; fish runs and seasons; eligibility; conservation; catch; fair distribution; zoning; identifying fishing sites; subsistence fishing; Tribally operated commercial fishing and permissible fishing. The Commission was created in February to address the commercial fishing dispute looming over the Tribe. Different interpretations of the Tribe?s fishing ordinance, Title 16, and subsequent 1989 commercial fishing referendum have Tribal leaders questioning what the laws actually mean and how to update them to suit the current needs of the Hoopa Tribe. The all volunteer Commission is responsible for creating regulations for the Council to consider. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 21 11:34:32 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:34:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Front Page, Two Rivers Tribune Message-ID: <284B9327-43F3-4EF3-9F38-BCAD5FF3511D@att.net> http://www.tworiverstribune.com/ A group of concerned Hoopa Tribal members hung a large banner from the Trinity River bridge in Hoopa on Monday, April 18. The group is also circulating a petition to have the contentious issue placed back on the Tribal ballot. Hoopa Tribal members last approved commercial fishing in 1989 with a 152-100 vote./Photo by Kay Heitkamp, Two Rivers Tribune -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1716nocommercial2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 73965 bytes Desc: not available URL: From PManza at usbr.gov Tue Apr 26 16:20:43 2011 From: PManza at usbr.gov (Manza, Peggy L) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 17:20:43 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Lewiston Release Changes CORRECTION Message-ID: Please make the following release changes at Lewiston Dam: Date time from (cfs) to (cfs) 4-21-11 2300 300 400 4-22-11 0100 400 500 4-27-11 2100 500 750 4-27-11 2300 750 1,000 4-28-11 0100 1,000 1,250 4-28-11 0300 1,250 1,500 4-30-11 1200 1,500 1,750 4-30-11 1300 1,750 2,000 4-30-11 1400 2,000 2,500 4-30-11 1500 2,500 3,000 4-30-11 1600 3,000 3,500 4-30-11 1700 3,500 4,000 4-30-11 1800 4,000 4,500 5-1-11 2300 4,500 5,500 5-2-11 0100 5,500 6,500 5-2-11 0300 6,500 7,500 5-2-11 0500 7,500 8,000 5-2-11 2300 8,000 9,000 5-3-11 0100 9,000 10,000 5-4-11 0600 10,000 11,000 Ordered by: Peggy Manza Note: Trinity ROD spring pulse flow ramp up schedule -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 27 11:21:01 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:21:01 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Letter to Editor Trinity Journal-Reclamation the largest hurdle to fisheries restoration Message-ID: <20CFBF9A-AFE6-4E05-AC28-9020D9B8413B@att.net> Reclamation the largest hurdle to fisheries restoration http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-04-27/Opinion/Reclamation_the_largest_hurdle_to_fisheries_restor.html FROM TOM STOKELY CALIFORNIA WATER IMPACT NETWORK MT. SHASTA, CALIF. I write in response to Tom Rodgers? letter ?Junk science on Trinity flows? which appeared in the April 13 Trinity Journal. I understand the frustration that bass fishermen and Trinity Lake users feel toward higher Trinity River fishery flows due to reservoir drawdown. However, the real culprit is the Bureau of Reclamation, which has never made a promise it has kept in Trinity County. The impacts from Trinity Lake drawdown such as impacts to non-native bass were recognized when the Environmental Impact Statement and Report was prepared for Bruce Babbitt?s 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision that increased river flows to roughly 47 percent of the reservoir inflow. A number of mitigation measures were identified to reduce significant impacts, which included a barebones minimum pool for the reservoir, a Trinity Lake fish stocking program as well as extending boat ramps to allow improved low-water access. Predictably, BOR is now saying that they aren?t required to provide any mitigation for boat ramps or fish stocking, and they have said in writing that the inadequate minimum pool requirement for Trinity Lake is not ?hard and fast.? BOR has even gone so far as to say that California?s temperature standards for the Trinity River are not something that they have to comply with. See http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/141 for the letter on temperatures and a minimum pool. Regarding Rodgers? allegations of ?junk science,? I would like to point out that this year is considered a wet water year, not a normal water year that he alleges. The river gauging station at Lewiston was first established in 1912 before the dams were built, so historical flows can be determined since that time. According to those historic river gauges, river flows of 11,000 cfs at Lewiston were common before the dams were built, but very rare since then. I think if there is any criticism of the science behind the Trinity River Restoration Program, it is that the Bureau of Reclamation has largely ignored restoration of fish populations in tributaries such as the South Fork Trinity River and has instead focused millions on reshaping the river channel upstream of the North Fork, along with studying the river to death. It will be impossible to restore anything close to historic fish runs while the tributaries are ignored, especially for steelhead and coho. In summary, I?d have to quote a friend of mine who once said ?The Bureau of Reclamation is really good at turning the victims against each other.? As long as various Trinity interests keep taking cheap shots at each other, the Bureau of Reclamation will drain Trinity Lake to a mud puddle during the next drought, and the salmon will ultimately die because there will be no cold water left in Trinity Lake to sustain them. The key to keeping Trinity Lake high and survival of the salmon and steelhead fisheries is establishment of an enforceable minimum cold-water pool at Trinity Lake. The California Water Impact Network continues to work toward that goal. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 27 12:55:19 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:55:19 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Ceremonies Could Stop Commercial Fishing at Peak of Fall Run Message-ID: Ceremonies Could Stop Commercial Fishing at Peak of Fall Run http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/04/ceremonies-could-stop-commercial-fishing-at-peak-of-fall-run/ Ken Norton, Chuckie Carpenter and Lois Risling discuss commercial fishing regulations at the April 12 Fish Commission meeting in Hoopa. Draft regulations are due to the Hoopa Tribal Council by May 24, 2011. Photo by Allie Hostler/TRT staff All fishing, other than ceremonial fishing, could be prohibited for 50 days during Hupa ceremonies under draft commercial fishing regulations to be considered by the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council next month. Coincidentally, the prohibition would occur during the peak of the fall Chinook salmon run. The 50-day prohibition was proposed by a cultural representative on the Commission, Clarence Hostler Sr. Other cultural commissioners have not returned to the table following a misunderstanding about their level of participation on the Commission. During the previous meeting, Tribal attorney, Gene Burke said he would seek direction from the Tribal Council on how to proceed, and if a letter should be sent to the cultural commissioners who left their seats vacant following a Tribal Council motion to separate the cultural members from the voting body of the Fish Commission, reducing their role to the advisory level. Burke, nor the Tribal Council, provided an update at the most recent meeting. Hostler defined ceremonial fishing in a draft proposal as, ?The taking and provision of salmon, sturgeon and other Trinity River species, to supply food for ceremonialists, dancers, and the people at the time of the ceremonial dances, including distribution to elders and families in need during the time of ceremonies. And, Restoration and continuation of the First Salmon Ceremony with annual construction and use of a traditional fish dam on the Trinity River.? Prohibition dates identified include ten days prior to the White Deerskin Dance, ten days during, ten days following, ten days during the Jump Dance and ten days following the Jump Dance. The consecutive ceremonies typically occur from mid to late August through mid to late September every other year. George Kautsky, representing the Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Department, clarified that a commercial fishing prohibition during the 50-day period would occur during the height of the fall Chinook salmon run and that marketable salmon tend to migrate through the Hoopa portion of the Trinity River during parts of August, September and October. Kautsky said that the marketability of salmon greatly drops in November as the fish near the end of their migration and natural lifecycle. Also, coho salmon, a federally protected species tend to have their peak migration in late Fall. Audience member and Tribal member, Steve Baldy asked that the Commission consider writing the section more broadly so as not to restrict the prohibition only to ceremonies currently being practiced. He mentioned several ceremonies that could be reinstated in the future as Hupa culture becomes revitalized such as the Spring Jump Dance, the Salmon Ceremony and the Acorn Ceremony. ?If we expand our uses of salmon we can get more water and facilitate the rejuvenation of those ceremonies and better restore the fishery at the same time,? Baldy said. ?I?m not trying to just stop commercial fishing, but it seems like we need to think of all these things if we are going to have a regulation that works for Hupa people.? Commissioner Ken Norton expressed concern that further broadening the restrictions could eliminate commercial fishing completely. Although Norton had no objection to limiting commercial fishing during the specified days for observance of tradition during the White Deerskin Dance and the Jump Dance, he didn?t agree with limiting subsistence fishing. ?We also have to acknowledge that not 100 percent of our Tribal members participate in the ceremonies,? Norton said. ?I?m a traditionalist, but I don?t see how this body can make a recommendation to prohibit subsistence fishing. I think that?s going too far.? Audience and Tribal memberRhonda Jones-O?Neill said, ?The cultural area is one that we cannot compromise on. If we become too far removed from who we are as Hupa people we begin to lose the essence of what makes us unique. We need to stay true to who we are.? ?Both subsistence and ceremonial fishing are to be protected for Tribal members as essential, cultural aspects of Tribal members? cultural identity and legal rights, with seniority as rights, establishing a basis for tribal fishing rights, thus establishing a basis for tribal commercial fishing rights,? Hostler wrote in his draft proposal. Conservation Kautsky provided a chart of information outlining the allocation process and conservation goals for Klamath River salmon, specifically the fall run. Kautsky also clarified that Trinity River salmon runs are considered Klamath salmon since the two rivers and their tributaries are part of a single watershed, the Klamath Basin. The numbers show that in the past 20 years Hoopa Tribal members caught an average of nine percent of the inter-tribal allocation. But, numbers can be deceiving. The intertribal allocation, arrived at through a complex process facilitated by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council, is currently shared with the Yurok Tribe, which claims 80 percent, leaving 20 percent to Hoopa?also a point of contention. When the math is done, it is also accurate to say that Hoopa Tribal members catch nearly 50 percent of their quota on average. Baldy said that by using the nine percent figure, the Tribal membership had been misled into thinking they were dramatically falling short of catching the quota, and at risk of losing a portion of their quota in the future?the use it or lose it conundrum. He added that another way to present the numbers would be to explain to the membership how close they are to meeting the Tribe?s quota rather than how close they are to meeting a shared quota with the Yurok Tribe. Using more than 20 years of harvest management data, Kautsky said that about 11 percent of the inter-tribal allocation?or, just over 50 percent of the Hoopa specific quota?would be available for a commercial fishery. Kautsky excluded harvest numbers from 2008 and 2009?when Tribal Police began to issue transportation permits for those traveling off the reservation to sell fish?so as to avoid skewing the representation of subsistence and ceremonial take. Kautsky briefly shared a chart he prepared to outline conservation and management of spring run Chinook. Natural spawning spring run Chinook are largely ignored in contemporary management of Klamath salmon and are currently being considered for listing on the Endangered Species List. Chairwoman Lois Risling asked if the Tribe had identified its own conservation standard for spring run Chinook. Kautsky answered no, but provided an estimate of the impact Hoopa fishermen have to naturally spawning spring run Chinook. He said by prohibiting fishing for spring run Chinook, about 23 additional fish would make it to the South Fork of the Trinity to spawn. That?s about 14 percent of the entire South Fork of the Trinity spring run. On the contrary, Hoopa fishermen and families would have foregone about 1,400 fish to allow about 23 to pass. There will not be a Fish Commission meeting this week due to the Tribe?s primary election. Chairwoman Lois Risling plans to have a compilation of the Commissioners? proposals in draft form for Commission review on Tuesday, May 4. The Commission is scheduled to deliver their draft regulations and recommendations to the Tribal Council on May 24. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1716fishcommission.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 52217 bytes Desc: not available URL: From PManza at usbr.gov Thu Apr 28 13:12:29 2011 From: PManza at usbr.gov (Manza, Peggy L) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 14:12:29 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Lewiston Release Changes CORRECTION NO. 2 Message-ID: Please make the following release changes at Lewiston Dam: Date time from (cfs) to (cfs) 4-21-11 2300 300 400 4-22-11 0100 400 500 4-27-11 2100 500 750 4-27-11 2300 750 1,000 4-28-11 0100 1,000 1,250 4-28-11 0300 1,250 1,500 4-30-11 1200 1,500 1,750 4-30-11 1300 1,750 2,000 4-30-11 1400 2,000 2,500 4-30-11 1500 2,500 3,000 4-30-11 1600 3,000 3,500 4-30-11 1700 3,500 4,000 4-30-11 1800 4,000 4,500 5-1-11 2300 4,500 5,500 5-2-11 0100 5,500 6,500 5-2-11 0300 6,500 7,500 5-2-11 0500 7,500 8,000 5-2-11 2300 8,000 9,000 5-3-11 0600 9,000 10,000 5-4-11 0600 10,000 11,000 Ordered by: Peggy Manza Note: Trinity ROD spring pulse flow ramp up schedule -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Mon May 2 09:20:45 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 09:20:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Palin in Westlands sobbing for their water cutbacks! Message-ID: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_calif_palin_college_speech Palin decries water restrictions at Calif. college By GOSIA WOZNIACKA, Associated Press Gosia Wozniacka, Associated Press ? Sun May 1, 10:20 pm ET LEMOORE, Calif. ? Sarah Palin returned to Central California's agricultural region Sunday and lambasted the federal government for limiting the amount of water the state's farmers can get for their crops. The former Alaska governor told more than 1,400 people at West Hills College in Lemoore that endangered species regulations protecting the Delta smelt and limiting pumping are "destroying" the lives of those in the Central Valley. "A faceless government is taking away their lifeline, water, all because of a 3-inch fish," Palin said. "Where I come from, a 3-inch fish, we call that bait. There is no need to destroy people's lives over bait." Palin also spoke about high gas prices, dependence on foreign oil, the need for domestic drilling and limiting currency inflation. "The government should get out of our way and let us get this economy moving again," she said. "Instead of drilling ourselves and circulating the money here, we're relying on foreign regimes." The audience in what is generally a conservative region was supportive, cheering and applauding loudly. Someone even broke out with, "We love you Sarah!" "It was awesome, she was right on," said Doug Freitas, a Lemoore farmer, after the speech. "About water, there are farmers who can't grow their crops, these hardworking people can't pay their bills. And the deficit, it's so scary and it seems like the general public doesn't realize it." Palin's visit last year to California State University, Stanislaus ? about 120 miles away ? generated controversy after the university's nonprofit foundation refused to divulge the terms of her contract and speaking fee. The public university eventually revealed its foundation paid Palin $75,000 to give a 40-minute speech, and the event raised more than $207,000 for scholarships. This time, West Hills College's president, Don Warkentin, said its foundation paid the Washington Speakers Bureau $115,000 to land Palin for the inauguration of the college's newly built Golden Eagle Arena. Warkentin said he didn't know the exact amount Palin will receive. But he said the foundation has recouped the fee by selling tickets to a private, post-speech dinner with the 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate. Money from ticket sales will go toward scholarships and maintenance of the sports complex, Warkentin said. "California is in deep trouble," he said. "So we're doing things like this to try to maintain our programs and raise money for our students." The school, which has an enrollment of 3,000 this semester, did not provide an estimate of other costs associated with Palin's visit, including security, decorations and janitorial services. Palin is the first of several high profile figures the university will host as part of its new distinguished speaker series. Former first lady Laura Bush is scheduled to speak at the sports arena in September. Next February, Princeton scholar Cornell West will visit. State Sen. Leland Yee, who criticized UC Stanislaus for not releasing how much it paid Palin, praised the college in Lemoore for being more transparent. "I'm very pleased the foundation disclosed how much they will be paying Palin," Yee said. "I'm a little disappointed by the fact that Palin is a millionaire and our students are struggling, some of them cannot afford to go to college. I was hoping Sarah Palin would defer the fee and do the speech for the goodness of the college and for our students." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From AKrause at usbr.gov Mon May 2 15:58:05 2011 From: AKrause at usbr.gov (Krause, Andreas F) Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 16:58:05 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Release Update 5/2/11 Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A6D013F82@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Hello Everyone, The flow release schedule for May 2, 2011 calls for releases to the Trinity River of 8,000 cfs. Independent flow measurements at the Lewiston stream gage taken this afternoon validated that the flow releases to the Trinity River are 8,000 cfs as scheduled. The provisional real-time stream flows at the Lewiston stream gage were incorrectly being reported in excess of 10,000 cfs today. High flows often change the configuration of the river, which can lead to inaccurate real-time flow readings. For this reason, real-time stream flow data are always provisional and subject to change with validation flow measurements. The U.S. Geological Survey will continue making validation flow measurements this week throughout the remainder of the regularly scheduled high flow releases. Andreas Krause Trinity River Restoration Program Phone: 530-623-1800 Email: akrause at usbr.gov Website: www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From AKrause at usbr.gov Mon May 2 15:58:05 2011 From: AKrause at usbr.gov (Krause, Andreas F) Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 16:58:05 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Release Update 5/2/11 Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A6D013F82@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Hello Everyone, The flow release schedule for May 2, 2011 calls for releases to the Trinity River of 8,000 cfs. Independent flow measurements at the Lewiston stream gage taken this afternoon validated that the flow releases to the Trinity River are 8,000 cfs as scheduled. The provisional real-time stream flows at the Lewiston stream gage were incorrectly being reported in excess of 10,000 cfs today. High flows often change the configuration of the river, which can lead to inaccurate real-time flow readings. For this reason, real-time stream flow data are always provisional and subject to change with validation flow measurements. The U.S. Geological Survey will continue making validation flow measurements this week throughout the remainder of the regularly scheduled high flow releases. Andreas Krause Trinity River Restoration Program Phone: 530-623-1800 Email: akrause at usbr.gov Website: www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From curtisa at water.ca.gov Tue May 3 09:53:12 2011 From: curtisa at water.ca.gov (Anderson, Curtis) Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 09:53:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Nature - Salmon Running the Gauntlet Message-ID: <7DC173061296F944A62E8980A2B6AD7306EB7743C6@mrsbmapp20305.ad.water.ca.gov> Salmon Enthusiasts, FYI the PBS show Nature is running this week with an informative show about Salmon. It focuses on the Columbia River system and discusses issues such as dams, barging juveniles, hatcheries, genetics, and nutrients. I have included a broadcast schedule below for the local (KIXE Chico, Redding) PBS station. Also, here is a link about the show where you can watch the entire episode online: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/salmon-running-the-gauntlet/introduction/6546/ Take Care, Curtis Here is the local schedule: When to Watch Nature filter: sort: Monday, May 2 - 1:00pm 9.3 - KIXE World Salmon: Running the Gamut Examining the efforts to save the Pacific Northwest salmon from extinction, which include raising them in hatcheries and then transporting them on trucks and barges to the Columbia River a few miles below the Bonneville Dam. duration: 60 min details: [HD] | [cc] [stereo] [ed taping rights: 1 year] genre: Parents Picks get email reminder Monday, May 2 - 3:00pm 9.3 - KIXE World Salmon: Running the Gamut Examining the efforts to save the Pacific Northwest salmon from extinction, which include raising them in hatcheries and then transporting them on trucks and barges to the Columbia River a few miles below the Bonneville Dam. duration: 60 min details: [HD] | [cc] [stereo] [ed taping rights: 1 year] genre: Parents Picks get email reminder Monday, May 2 - 6:00pm 9.3 - KIXE World Salmon: Running the Gamut Examining the efforts to save the Pacific Northwest salmon from extinction, which include raising them in hatcheries and then transporting them on trucks and barges to the Columbia River a few miles below the Bonneville Dam. duration: 60 min details: [HD] | [cc] [stereo] [ed taping rights: 1 year] genre: Parents Picks get email reminder Monday, May 2 - 11:00pm 9.3 - KIXE World Salmon: Running the Gamut Examining the efforts to save the Pacific Northwest salmon from extinction, which include raising them in hatcheries and then transporting them on trucks and barges to the Columbia River a few miles below the Bonneville Dam. duration: 60 min details: [HD] | [cc] [stereo] [ed taping rights: 1 year] genre: Parents Picks get email reminder Tuesday, May 3 - 5:00am 9.1 - KIXE-HD Salmon: Running the Gamut Examining the efforts to save the Pacific Northwest salmon from extinction, which include raising them in hatcheries and then transporting them on trucks and barges to the Columbia River a few miles below the Bonneville Dam. duration: 60 min details: [HD] | [cc] [stereo] [ed taping rights: 1 year] genre: Parents Picks get email reminder Sunday, May 8 - 12:00am 9.1 - KIXE-HD Salmon: Running the Gamut Examining the efforts to save the Pacific Northwest salmon from extinction, which include raising them in hatcheries and then transporting them on trucks and barges to the Columbia River a few miles below the Bonneville Dam. duration: 60 min details: [HD] | [cc] [stereo] [ed taping rights: 1 year] genre: Parents Picks get email reminder -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Tue May 3 11:34:35 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 11:34:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Seeking academic discourse &/or suggestion for research Message-ID: Hi All, I'm having a problem trying to complete my masters degree. Being that many of you are doctorates and experts in your field with high levels of education, I was hoping someone may have some feedback for me. I'm down to my last semester working on a Master of Public Administration focusing on local and state level governmental administration. So next semester I have to write my policy paper (as opposed to a thesis) about a topic I have an interest in. Truthfully, I have no interest in anything, or have a clue about what to research. The reason I'm working on a masters is I really had no other options after the economic crash of 2008, being unemployed for a year, and no prospects for a job; so really its more about professional development for me instead of becoming an academic. That, and I'm not interested in being a line planner anymore, and instead interested in being an executive for local government who ensures transparency, fairness, and the continuation of our democratic republic in the interest of the people (as opposed to business). Anyways, I need to come up with three potential questions by next week, narrowing down one of them, and do the research and rough draft this summer. The topic has to focus on a governmental policy, provide background such as literature review/etc., analyze it, and provide recommendations. Does anyone have any suggestions that may help give me a lead? Thanks for you time! Josh -- "A human being is part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. We experience ourselves, our thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest. A kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from the prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. The true value of a human being is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self. We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if humanity is to survive." ~ Albert Einstein, 1954 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Wed May 4 12:24:17 2011 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 12:24:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group Meeting Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) is scheduled to meet May 17, 2011. The discussion topics are listed in the meeting notice. Best regards, Vina Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2011)] [Notices] [Page 23621] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ http://www.gpo.gov/] [FR Doc No: 2011-10141] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2011-N083; 81331-1334-8TWG-W4] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a TAMWG meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG will meet from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Tuesday, May 17, 2011. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Weaverville Victorian Inn, 1709 Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Randy A. Brown, TAMWG Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP)Information: Jennifer Faler, Acting Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623- 1800; e-mail: jfaler at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a meeting of the TAMWG.The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: TRRP FY 2012 budget and work plan, Temperature and reservoir management and recent CVO letter, Acting Executive Director's Report, Policies for work in tributary watersheds, Initial report on peak releases, Channel rehabilitation phase II planning update, TMC chair report, TAMWG bylaws, and Designated Federal Officer topics. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. Dated: April 21, 2011. Joseph Polos, Supervisory Fishery Biologist, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2011-10141 Filed 4-26-11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From PManza at usbr.gov Wed May 4 15:35:34 2011 From: PManza at usbr.gov (Manza, Peggy L) Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 16:35:34 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Lewiston Release Changes Message-ID: Please make the following release changes at Lewiston Dam: Date time from (cfs) to (cfs) 5-7-11 0600 11,000 10,500 5-7-11 1000 10,500 10,000 5-7-11 1400 10,000 9,500 5-7-11 2100 9,500 9,000 5-8-11 0100 9,000 8,500 5-8-11 0500 8,500 8,000 5-8-11 0900 8,000 7,500 5-8-11 1300 7,500 7,000 5-8-11 1700 7,000 6,600 5-8-11 2100 6,600 6,100 5-9-11 0100 6,100 5,600 5-9-11 0500 5,600 5,200 5-9-11 0900 5,200 4,800 5-9-11 1300 4,800 4,500 5-14-11 0100 4,500 4,380 5-15-11 0100 4,380 4,270 5-16-11 0100 4,270 4,160 5-17-11 0100 4,160 4,050 5-18-11 0100 4,050 3,940 5-19-11 0100 3,940 3,830 5-20-11 0100 3,830 3,720 5-21-11 0100 3,720 3,620 5-22-11 0100 3,620 3,500 5-27-11 0100 3,500 3,420 5-28-11 0100 3,420 3,320 5-29-11 0100 3,320 3,220 5-30-11 0100 3,220 3,130 5-31-11 0100 3,130 3,040 Ordered by: Peggy Manza Note: Trinity ROD flow ramp down schedule -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 5 20:03:14 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 20:03:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Yurok Tribe Limits Spring Fishing Message-ID: <865269D9-EA41-4E36-A1A9-EFA4DA3F50C7@att.net> Yurok Tribe Limits Spring Fishing http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/05/yurok-tribe-limits-spring-fishing/ In response to the decline of wild spring chinook salmon of the Klamath-Trinity Basin and concern regarding the status of green sturgeon, the Yurok Tribal Council has closed the spring fishery for three days per week, in addition to several other conservation regulations ?Closing the fishery is never an easy decision for our Council,? said Thomas O?Rourke, Yurok Tribal Chairman. ?Our people depend upon these fish to feed their families. However, it was decided to make this sacrifice to provide for our great grandchildren and beyond.?This decision was made after gathering input from five public meetings, the Natural Resource Committee, and the Tribal Fisheries Program. The Tribe is concerned that natural populations, primarily from the South Fork Trinity and Salmon Rivers, of spring Chinook are at low levels. Annual abundance of spring chinook from the South Fork Trinity has averaged about 120 fish during each of the past seven years. By comparison, more than 11,000 adult spring Chinook returned to the river to spawn in 1964. Currently, there are no federal or state-coordinated conservation objectives guiding the harvest of spring chinook. However, the Yurok Tribe, consistent with its longstanding approach to harvest management, does not see this as a reason to not proactively protect weak stocks. The Tribe encourages co-managers that harvest this species to adopt similar regulations to protect these fish. ?It is not easy for our fishers to stay off the river, while other fisheries proceed without consideration for these imperiled fish,? Chairman O?Rourke said. ?We encourage co-managers to work with us to protect these vital stocks, by adopting conservation measures similar to what we have done for several years.? The Tribe also adopted several regulations to protect green sturgeon, in addition to the three-day per week closure. While population numbers are not available for this species, there is concern based upon degraded habitat conditions faced by these fish and the vulnerability of this stock to over-exploitation, given that they don?t spawn until they are nearly 17 years old. Another component of the spring regulations requires that the dorsal fin be removed from all harvested spring chinook, so it is obvious that these are subsistence fish. As in past years, the Council adopted regulations making it illegal to sell or purchase spring Chinook. For more information and to view the complete regulation change visit http://yuroktribe.org/departments/fisheries/fallharvest.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 5 20:08:46 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 20:08:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Petition Circulating to Revisit Hoopa Commercial Fishing Message-ID: <9BEC863C-6479-4EE6-A0BC-0F1D5DC41241@att.net> Petition Circulating to Revisit Hoopa Commercial Fishing http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/05/petition-circulating-to-revisit-hoopa-commercial-fishing/ By ALLIE HOSTLER, Two Rivers Tribune A petition to put commercial fishing back on the Hoopa Tribal ballot is circulating amongst Tribal members, receiving more than the required 253 signatures on Monday, May 2. It is unclear if the issue will be placed on the June general election ballot or on a special election ballot. Tribal member and petition carrier, Dana Rose Colegrove started the movement three weeks ago and has garnered the support of several more tribal members, mostly women, who decided to take the matter into their own hands rather than rely on their elected leaders to change the status quo. ?I speak up for the fish, since they can?t do so for themselves,? Colegrove said. Colegrove spends most of her free time and extra money organizing and attending public hearings, protests and meetings as a grassroots activist. Her focus for the past nine years has been on un-damming the Klamath River so that naturally spawning Chinook salmon can swim to their natal waters to spawn. Although there is no evidence that commercial or subsistence fishing by Hoopa people has caused salmon population declines, Colegrove is concerned that the fishery will eventually be depleted because of its monetary value. Last year during the fall run of Chinook salmon various Hoopa tribal members spoke out against commercial fishing?a practice that began to gain momentum amongst several Hoopa fishermen who earned as much as $40 per fish. A few fishermen sold several hundred fish. Some tribal members complain that the opportunity to sell fish and buyer information was not properly announced and monetarily benefited only a select few. They also argue that the tribal law on commercial fishing lacks actual regulations. And, that the act of selling fish is not conducive to Hupa tradition and culture. The membership outcry and subsequent threats of violence spurred Vice Chairman, Byron Nelson Jr. to place a temporary moratorium on commercial fishing last September. Although the above arguments are made redundantly the complaint about who is selling fish is just as common?the director of the Tribal Fisheries Department, Mike Orcutt and the Tribal self Governance Coordinator, Daniel Jordan are taking the brunt of the criticism. Petition carrier and tribal member, Jill Sherman lives and works in the San Diego area, but is rooted in Hoopa. She formerly served as a Hoopa Tribal Council member and has several years of experience working to enhance and protect tribal natural resources on the Hoopa reservation and off. She traveled to Hoopa last week to collect signatures for the petition. ?I?m concerned about the fish. We?ve allowed people who are assigned with the trust duty to care for and protect the fishery, to rape the resource,? Sherman said. ?The reason I came is because I?m not financially reliant on the Tribe. They can?t take my job away. They can?t take away my freedom of speech. Unfortunately that?s the case with many of the tribal members who live here and work for the Tribe.? Orcutt, a life-long tribal fisherman, has spent more than 20 years working to protect Trinity River fish from both biological and political fronts. He was named the Director of the Tribal Fisheries Department in 1989 and saw the Tribe through several court battles and a historical victory that restored nearly 50 percent of Trinity River flows back to the river. It?s no secret that Orcutt is a fisherman for subsistence and for the past few seasons, for income. Orcutt believes all tribal fishing , including for commercial purposes, is a exercise of tribal sovereignty and that the closer the Tribe comes to meeting its annual allocation of harvestable fish, the better the Tribe?s chances are to retain and strengthen its claim to Trinity River water needed to restore the fishery. ?It?s unfortunate that politics have driven issues to this point. I agree regulations need to be developed that address individual concern over commercial fishing,? Orcutt said. ?This issue has been taken to an unnecessary emotional level having the fire flamed with misinformation that is simply not true. We should be more concerned about the outside politics and water grabs or we can simply continue to regulate Tribal members if we have enough fish and water. I?ve always went to wall on fishery and water negotiations trying to get as much as we could use, but if we are comfortable not harvesting our share of the fishery, and feel we have too much water, than the tribe needs to reassess its goals.? In 1989 the fishery resource began to look like a potential industry for economic development. The idea didn?t come without criticism. When the question was placed on the ballot, the membership voted 152 to 100, making it legal to commercial fish, however the referendum language caused some confusion as to whether or not regulations needed to be in place prior to the sale of any fish. Legal opinions vary on the interpretation of the law, however, the Tribe?s long-time attorney, Tom Schlosser believes it was legal for an informal commercial fishery to occur under the 1989 Referendum. During a politically volatile time with elections fast approaching, in February, the Tribal Council convened a fish commission. The Commission was assigned the task of developing commercial fishing regulations for the Council to consider. The Fish Commission?s work is scheduled to be complete later this month. Now, with nearly 850 voters making it to polls in the primary, some feel it?s time to re-vote on the issue. Not all petition signors are saying they are against commercial fishing, they are saying they want the issue back on the ballot. The petition reads: We the undersigned members of the Hoopa Valley Tribe, and the citizens of the Hoopa Nation, hereby petition the Election Board to conduct a Referendum Election to overturn the July 1989 referendum on Resolution 89-104 in order to reinstate the ban on commercial fishing found in the Tribe?s Fishing Ordinance in its entirety. The July 1989 Referendum on Resolution 89-104, provides for commercial fishing on the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation. In order to ensure and enhance the preservation of the Cultural and Traditional Hoopa Tribal fishing rights, commercial fishing shall not continue. Question: Shall the Hoopa Valley Tribe continue commercial fishing on the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri May 6 07:52:44 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 07:52:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River water flows second highest since dams installed; release intended to flush waterway Message-ID: Trinity River water flows second highest since dams installed; release intended to flush waterway By Dylan Darling Redding Record Searchlight http://www.redding.com/news/2011/may/04/trinity-river-water-flows-second-highest-since/ Flows down the Trinity River Wednesday hit the second highest level since two dams were installed on the waterway 50 years ago. The Bureau of Reclamation released 11,400 cubic feet of water per second from Lewiston Dam, and the flows should stay at that level until late Friday. The high water is being released to flush the river as part of an ongoing restoration, said Jennifer Faler, acting executive director for the Trinity River Restoration Program. "We are at peak flow right now," she said Wednesday afternoon. The bureau started regulating flows on the river in 1960 and the highest flow on record since then is 14,400 cfs in 1974, said Andreas Krause, a hydraulic engineer with the program, which is a collaboration of local, state and federal agencies. That year high water levels in Lewiston Lake threatened to damage Lewiston Dam, prompting the release. The current heavy flows represent a departure from how the Trinity River used to be managed, Krause said. For decades after the river was dammed and diversions built to send its water to the Sacramento River, most of the water in Trinity and Lewiston lakes didn't go down the Trinity River. Until 2005 about 90 percent of the river's water went to the Sacramento, Krause said. The trickle that was left hit a high flow of about 1,500 cfs about every year and a half. Since the federal government finalized a restoration plan for the Trinity River six years ago the diversion to the Sacramento has decreased by half and the Trinity flows have increased, he said. Now they hit a high flow of about 6,000 cfs every year and a half. Along the river restoration efforts include salmon spawning gravel deposits and riverside planting, Faler said. The current high flows will enhance these efforts, she said. The rush of water will move the gravel and reshape the river, mimicking the ebb and flow of nature, Faler said. "We want a dynamic channel," she said, "meaning that it changes each year." While the flows are big now, the river used to see flows around 11,000 cfs every year and a half, Krause said. "Before the dam this was a very common occurrence," he said. And it's only a little less than a seventh of the peak recorded flow on the Trinity. The peak recorded flow at Lewiston was 71,600 cfs in 1955, Krause said. The 11,000 cfs-plus flows are enough to keep rafters from running the river. "For a while there are not going to be any of our boats on the water," said Marc Rowley, owner of Bigfoot Rafting Co. in Willow Creek. He said some experienced kayakers might be tackling the white water though. Flows around 5,500 cfs are considered "big," or high and fast, water on the Trinity River, said David Steinhauser, co-owner of Trinity River Rafting in Big Flat. Like Rowley, he said his company will keep its rafts out of the river until flows are down. The temporary disruption in floating the river will be worth the results of the high water, Steinhauser said. "I think it's going to make the upper sections of the river look more natural," he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon May 9 14:27:12 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 14:27:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Editorial: Trinity flood is a rare nod to river that was. Redding Record Searchlight Message-ID: <976066A2-FA1E-4380-9756-F4458810380B@att.net> Editorial: Trinity flood is rare nod to river that was http://www.redding.com/news/2011/may/06/editorial_firday/ It seems like just yesterday that an acute California drought was forcing emergency water-saving measures, idling farmland, and slapping surcharges on utility bills. Formally, Gov. Jerry Brown only declared that drought over at the end of March. Well, when it rains it indeed pours down a real gully-washer. Northern California has roughly double its normal snowpack. The reservoirs are full. And the Trinity River is surging with the largest spring flood in a generation. The construction of Trinity Dam and diversion of its water reduced the Trinity to a parched trickle until the Interior Department released its restoration plan in 2000. Since then, this is the first "extremely wet" year, bringing flows not seen in decades. The rush of water ? topping 11,000 cubic feet per second, for a few brief days ? is as much as 20 times the summertime flow that casual rafters might normally encounter. For perspective, the modest mountain river this week is running higher than the normally far larger Sacramento through Redding. The point of letting all that water flow isn't to display our sudden aquatic abundance or even, as on the Sacramento earlier this year, an emergency reservoir release to make room for later potential floods. Instead, it's a carefully controlled replica of the lost natural cycle of the river, designed to move the gravel that is essential for spawning fish, nourish streamside plants, and re-create something resembling wild channels. In a sense, rivers are living systems, and to thrive they need floods just as humans need exercise. Otherwise, they're just glorified drainage ditches. As part of the Central Valley Project, for decades as much as 90 percent of the Trinity's flows were slurped across the divide into the Sacramento Valley, where the water irrigated crops and watered lawns hundreds of miles to the south. The river's new balance has its costs: The lost water was a sharp blow during the drought, and the lower diversions have curbed hydroelectric generation. But we're still putting the Trinity River to use irrigating farms and lighting our homes. We're just doing so with a sense of proportion, leaving a share for nature. As long as the dams stand ? and they're essential to modern life in California ? the Trinity will never be truly wild. But this week's controlled flood is a nod to the river that was. It's a refreshing change to have the water to spare, but it's downright inspiring to know the Trinity is being given new life. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From awhitridge at dishmail.net Tue May 10 08:25:43 2011 From: awhitridge at dishmail.net (Arnold Whitridge) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 08:25:43 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG agenda for May 17 Message-ID: <5842F48F7D7643D9B8E41ADE0AD45F5B@arnPC> Here's the agenda for the May 17th meeting of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, Arnold Whitridge, TAMWG chair 530 623-6688 Proposed Agenda TRINITY ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP Tuesday, May 17, 2011 Victorian Inn large conference room, Weaverville, CA Time Presentation, Discussion, and/or Action on: Presenter 1. 9:00 Adopt agenda; approve April minutes 2. 9:10 Open forum; public comment 3. 9:30 TMC Chair report Brian Person 4. 10:00 Observations during peak releases TRRP staff 5. 10:30 Temperature issues, minimum pool criteria, & Tom Stokely, February 23 letter to TMC from Paul Fujitani Rod Wittler 6. 11:30 Acting Executive Director's report Jennifer Faler 12:00 lunch 7. 1:00 2012 TRRP work plan and budget Jennifer Faler 8. 2:30 Policies for work in tributary watersheds Solicitor guidance if available by meeting time 9. 3:00 Designated Federal Officer topics Randy Brown 10. 3:30 Goals & suggestions for joint TAMWG-TMC meeting June 29th 11. 4:00 Tentative date and agenda topics for next regular meeting 5:00 Adjourn . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Wed May 11 18:01:09 2011 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 17:01:09 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Sci.Amer.: Upstream Battle - What is Killing Off the Fraser River's Sockeye? Message-ID: <20110511180119.B959A4F2@m0004615.ppops.net> Scientific American Permanent Address: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-killing-off-fraser-river-sockeye-salmon Upstream Battle: What Is Killing Off the Fraser River's Sockeye Salmon? [Slide Show] A recent study suggests a mystery pathogen acting in concert with human-induced stressors may be the culprits By Anne Casselman | Thursday, May 5, 2011 | 4 sockeye-salmon SPAWNING HOME: Adult sockeye return to their birthplace, Scotch Creek, to spawn before dying. Scotch Creek is located in South Central British Columbia and feeds into the Fraser River, home to one of the world's largest wild sockeye salmon runs. Image: ? Matt Casselman Advertisement Gridlocked bridges over the Fraser River are just a part of life for commuting Vancouverites. But the industrialized motif of North America's longest dam-free river belies a rare natural treasure: a sockeye salmon run with a historical average of eight million fish worth over $1 billion. Since the early 1990s the numbers of Fraser sockeye have steadily dwindled, reaching a particularly troublesome nadir in 2009 when more than 11 million sockeye were forecast to return and only 1.4 million showed up. Since the mid-1990s, something began killing large numbers of returning sockeye on the Fraser?anywhere from 40 to 95 percent of fish in some years?before they could spawn. Now a study bolsters the hypothesis that a mysterious pathogen working in concert with other anthropogenic stressors may be the culprit. Led by Fisheries and Oceans Canada, a team of scientists tracked returning Fraser River sockeye to see whether the genetic activity of those that successfully spawned differed from the activity of those that perished prematurely en route. Sure enough, salmon with a certain pattern of gene expression in their gill tissue were 13.5 times more likely to die than those that didn't carry the "you've not got long to live" signature, as co-author and University of British Columbia (U.B.C.) fish physiologist Tony Farrell puts it. Most intriguingly the mortality-related genomic signature in the fish resembled that triggered by a viral infection. "This was a needle-in-haystack investigation, so we were more than pleased that we identified a signature, and then to narrow it down to what might be a viral signature was surprising," says Farrell. Months after the study came out mid-January in Science the research continues to make waves on Canada's west coast as journalists and environmentalists speculate as to whether the genomic signature identified in the study might be evidence of an epidemic of salmon leukemia, known to have plagued salmon fish farms along British Columbia's coast.* Lead study author Kristi Miller-Saunders, a molecular geneticist at Fisheries and Oceans Canada in Nanaimo, has not been given the green light to speak freely with the press, however she did respond to questions from Scientific American via e-mail. "One of the most important findings of this study was the fact that salmon were already compromised before entering the river" on their journey home to spawn, she wrote. The scientists are currently studying juvenile salmon to see if the genomic signature is already present before they go out to the open ocean. Miller-Saunders also reports "there is some indication that the signature may be in Chinook and coho" salmon, too. View a slideshow of salmon species potentially affected by the virus Unpublished studies have found the signature in other cohorts of Fraser sockeye, suggesting that the phenomenon spans different years. But the mystery virus remains unidentified. Attempts by Miller-Saunders's lab to culture the virus from affected tissue and do molecular screenings of known pathogens have come up empty. Currently she is attempting to sequence the pathogen from the tissues of affected fish. "The possibility of a disease affecting these fish has been on the table long before this paper came out and the usual suspect has been fish farms," says John Reynolds, a salmon conservation scientist at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, British Columbia. "My impression is that the hard evidence isn't there yet to either implicate fish farms or to let them off the hook." Death by a thousand cuts The study only correlates a genomic signature with mortality, rather than proving any causal relation, but it also hints at how genomic markers can inform better management of the dwindling sockeye stocks. "The question is: Is disease getting worse by combinations with other either natural or anthropogenic stressors?" says Jim Winton, a microbiologist at the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) Western Fisheries Research Center in Seattle. He runs through a laundry list of factors that could amplify virus-driven disease mortality: fisheries shifting food chains, global warming, marine pollutant?triggered toxic algae blooms, marine pollution in the form of chemical contaminants, and endocrine disruptors altering the host?pathogen balance. In Chinook salmon in Alaska's Yukon River, for example, the prevalence and mortality from the parasite Ichthyophonus has recently risen in concert with climate change, which has increased river temperatures by an alarming 5 degrees Celsius. "At these higher temperatures, this disease goes much faster," Winton explains. The rise in mortality of Pacific herring in Puget Sound tells a similar story. There, Winton's lab has identified "three candidate diseases that we believe are now much worse than they used to be . So there are cases in wild populations where we believe changes, and many of them man-induced, are altering the impact of natural mortality from disease." The Fraser River itself has undergone considerable warming. Seven of the past 10 summers have broken records as the warmest. River temperatures are nearly two degrees C warmer than 50 years ago, a problem for these cold-blooded fish. In the twilight of their brief lives adult Pacific salmon migrate back to their river of birth to spawn, perpetuating a four-year life cycle that boomerangs thousands of kilometers into the ocean. "These are very old fish, imagine these are like your grandmothers and grandfathers," says Scott Hinch, a salmon ecologist at the U.B.C. who co-authored the Science paper. By the time Pacific salmon close in on their spawning grounds, they are senescent and naturally immunosuppressed. "So any small disease, parasite, illness that is naturally occurring that is there they will pick up, and then it's often a race against time." The salmon naturally expire after the Herculean effort of swimming upstream and spawning, but too many fish perishing prematurely before they've had a chance to lay eggs and fertilize them spells trouble. Aquatic pollution may further exacerbate things. "We believe that some of the classes of contaminants that are now in the environment, such as these endocrine disruptors coming out of sewage treatment plants, are having an impact on the immune function in fish and altering disease resistance," Winton says. Likewise, the Fraser River sockeye are met with sewage outflows from Vancouver at the river's mouth in the Strait of Georgia. "Personally, I think changing the environmental quality in the Strait of Georgia is a major part of this explanation for the Fraser sockeye as well," says Brian Riddell, CEO of the Pacific Salmon Foundation in Vancouver. Dead fish swimming To further muddy the already murky waters are the "early migrating late runs". If it sounds paradoxical, that's because everything about these fish runs counter to reason. These are sockeye that historically migrated late in the spawning season but recently have begun to jump earlier by several weeks. All one really needs to know about this cohort is the term Hinch has coined for them: "dead fish swimming". That and the fact that the majority of fish sampled in Miller-Saunders's study, the ones carrying the mortality-related genetic signature, were part of these early migrating late runs. "Generally the earlier migrating fish are the ones that are dying," Hinch says. "The grand picture is that these fish are screwed basically when they come back." Since 1996 a larger and larger percentage of the late runs have begun to come back two to three weeks (at most, a month) early. These days, anywhere between 40 and 95 percent of the late runs are migrating earlier when river temperatures are much higher than what they would historically encounter. Research by Hinch and his colleagues found that the early migrating late-run fish differ physiologically from their normal-timed counterparts. They are more reproductively mature, stressed, and their physiology is precociously oriented toward the freshwater environment. "So not only are they forced to deal with [river] temperatures that are potentially lethal, they're also what appears to be compromised in some fashion," Hinch says. The nearby Columbia River's sockeye, along with steelhead (also known as rainbow trout), which face temperatures 2.5 degrees warmer than the historical average, have shifted their migration times to avoid peak summer temperatures. Not so with the Fraser's early migrating late runs, which migrate right when the river is warmest. "Clearly this is not an adaptive strategy to climate change," Hinch says. "The fact that it's not getting selected against suggests that there's something annually causing this to happen and a disease makes a sense." Even though the Columbia River's fish seem to be better at adapting their migration patterns than the fish on the Fraser, that's not to say that it's the model to follow. "The Columbia [River] is a great cautionary tale as they consider what to do about the salmon situation up there," says the director of a new PBS documentary, Salmon: Running the Gauntlet, Jim Norton. The film investigates collapsing Pacific salmon populations all down the Pacific Northwest and examines how biologists and engineers are trying to better manage the region's threatened salmon runs. "The Columbia's message to the Fraser is: In the consideration about how to respond to changes you don't yet understand, be very clear that once you break the system, no amount of money, creativity or engineering will ever get the pieces back together again," Norton says. Can science save the salmon? The large number of missing Fraser River sockeye in 2009 prompted a Canadian federal judicial inquiry into the matter, the Cohen Commission. And just to underscore how little scientists understood of the fish, the sockeye run in 2010 was a once-in-a-century bonanza, with 34 million fish flooding the river. "From a historic low to a historic high almost?that creates a lot of uncertainty for management but it also raises questions on why it's swinging so much," says U.B.C.'s Farrell. The USGS's Winton points out that the sockeye run of 2010 was an anomaly, in the face of a steady and worrisome decline in Fraser sockeye over the years. The Cohen Commission is currently underway and study co-author Hinch was called to the stand as a witness in mid-March. "Moving forward the real issue is whatever this is, what do we do now and how do you manage in the face of it," he says. Miller-Saunders, for her part, will go on the stand later this summer to speak about her research, which has already been referenced in the enquiry's proceedings. Up until then, it is unlikely that she will be allowed to speak freely to the media about her research. British Columbia Supreme Court Justice Bruce Cohen, the commissioner who is overseeing the investigation, is in the unenviable position of hearing everyone out and making recommendations to ensure the future sustainability of the fishery by June 2012. "We will have a full hearing session on diseases and the impact, if any, of aquaculture. The interplay between climate change warming and pathogens, if any, will be part of that subject," says Brian Wallace, senior commission counsel. The Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans also has to juggle an immense number of stakeholders and their needs when managing the Fraser sockeye: coastal fisheries with different gear types, the in-river First Nations harvest, and one of the largest recreational fisheries in Canada. "They were hoping that our research would tell them what do you do and our research is telling them this is tough," Hinch says. "So we're probably never going to come up with the exact cause but we may be well able to piece together a series of potential causes." --Francie Diep wrote and produced the slide show that accompanies this story. *Clarification (5/5/11): This sentence was modified after publication to change the tense of the verb describing when leukemia has plagued salmon fish farms along British Columbia's coast. Scientific American is a trademark of Scientific American, Inc., used with permission ? 2011 Scientific American, a Division of Nature America, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Email this Article Upstream Battle: What Is Killing Off the Fraser River's Sockeye Salmon? [Slide Show] Your Email Address Recipient's Email Address (separate multiple addresses with a comma) Comment (optional) X -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri May 13 11:35:55 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:35:55 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away Message-ID: All, It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From gking at asis.com Fri May 13 13:57:10 2011 From: gking at asis.com (Greg King) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 13:57:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <975E89A7-86D7-4752-A94A-5848264F284A@asis.com> Truly sad. A major passing. When I took over at NEC I met with Byron in Mill Valley, at his favorite Italian restaurant. He had a regular table (back against the wall), and he ordered for us. Then in one hour he provided the best possible download on the Trinity River, its environment, its people and its politics. Afterward, whenever we spoke he was always kind, informative and rather difficult to keep up with. He will be missed. Tom, thanks for sending this along. Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gking at asis.com http://siskiyouland.wordpress.com/ On May 13, 2011, at 11:35 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > All, > > It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker > passed away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. > > He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity > River Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. > > Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. > > More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. > > Tom Stokely > Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact > California Water Impact Network > V/FAX 530-926-9727 > Cell 530-524-0315 > tstokely at att.net > http://www.c-win.org > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ema.berol at yahoo.com Fri May 13 14:18:58 2011 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emelia Berol) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 14:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away Message-ID: <375174.50819.qm@web46215.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> I loved Byron and will miss him very much. I can relate to what Greg has written, I had a similar experience, in 1997, when I began working on the documentary, Waters of These Mountains. Thank you for letting us know, Tom. Byron's daughter Lama Palden (Caroline Alioto) is an old friend of mine, and she used to visit me with her son when I lived on a farm on the South Fork Trinity. The river is a hard place for kids to learn to swim ...as it turned out, my daughter Paloma took her first swimming strokes in Byron's swimming pool in Tiburon! This was 20 years before I came to know Byron as the director of FOTR. He was a great man who gave of himself tirelessly for the river he loved so dearly. Emelia Berol TAMWG Rep for the NEC P.O. 300 Willow Creek, California 95573 ________________________________ From: Greg King To: Tom Stokely Cc: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Fri, May 13, 2011 1:57:10 PM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away Truly sad. A major passing. When I took over at NEC I met with Byron in Mill Valley, at his favorite Italian restaurant. He had a regular table (back against the wall), and he ordered for us. Then in one hour he provided the best possible download on the Trinity River, its environment, its people and its politics. Afterward, whenever we spoke he was always kind, informative and rather difficult to keep up with. He will be missed. Tom, thanks for sending this along. Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gking at asis.com http://siskiyouland.wordpress.com/ On May 13, 2011, at 11:35 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: All, > > >It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed away >this morning. He died in comfort with his family. > > >He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River >Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. > > >Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. > > >More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. > > >Tom Stokely >Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact >California Water Impact Network >V/FAX 530-926-9727 >Cell 530-524-0315 >tstokely at att.net >http://www.c-win.org > > >_______________________________________________ >env-trinity mailing list >env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri May 13 16:07:13 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 16:07:13 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: CALIFORNIA LEGISATORS SEEK SAVINGS BY CUTTING SUCTION DREDGE MINING PROGRAM References: <68057344-E9F0-486A-94C5-577953F6B179@davidnesmith.com> Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: > From: Craig Tucker > Date: May 13, 2011 9:53:18 AM PDT > To: undisclosed-recipients:; > Subject: CALIFORNIA LEGISLATORS SEEK SAVINGS BY CUTTING SUCTION DREDGE MINING PROGRAM > > Karuk Tribe > > P R E S S R E L E A S E > > For Immediate Release: May 13, 2011 > > For more information: Craig Tucker, Klamath Coordinator, Karuk Tribe, 916-207-8294 > > > CALIFORNIA LEGISLATORS SEEK SAVINGS BY CUTTING SUCTION DREDGE MINING PROGRAM > Move would save money, advance salmon restoration, and improve water quality > > Sacramento, CA ? This week, budget sub -committees in both houses of the California legislature approved identical budget cuts that could effectively end the environmentally destructive practice of suction dredge mining once and for all. The effort would save California tax payers nearly $2 million a year and aid the recovery of imperiled fisheries throughout the state. > > ?California is in the midst of an historic financial crisis. Taxpayers can no longer afford to subsidize this environmentally destructive hobby,? said Leaf Hillman, Director of the Karuk Tribe Department of Natural Resources. > > The move by the budget committees still has to be approved as part of the overall state budget, but reversing the proposal would require lawmakers to fight for budget increases to fund a dredge mining permit and enforcement program while they are at the same time faced with deep cuts to education, healthcare for the elderly, and law enforcement. > > According to the Department of Fish and Game?s own Environmental Impact Report, the dredging program raises $373,000 a year in permit fees, but under the newly proposed regulations would spend over $1.8 million in administration and enforcement. This fails to include the cost of defending the program from lawsuits filed by Tribes, taxpayers, and fishermen. > > Although the Department?s draft Environmental Impact Report found that dredging has ?significant and unavoidable? impacts to water quality due to the reintroduction of mercury to the food chain, the Department claimed it had no authority to regulate the practice on those grounds. The Karuk Tribe along with a host of fishing, environmental, and Tribal groups argue that the Department?s proposed regulations would fail to protect struggling runs of salmon, steelhead, and numerous other fish species while violating clean water laws. > > ?The legislature saw the flaws in the Department?s proposed mining regulations and acted to defund the program rather than continue to waste taxpayer money,? added Hillman. > > Currently, there is a double moratorium on dredge mining that stems from legislation passed in 2009 (SB 670 ? Wiggins) as well as a 2009 court ordered moratorium resulting from a lawsuit filed by taxpayers. These moratoriums remain in place until new regulations are approved and implemented. However, these budget cuts would prevent the Department from developing these regulations and thus prolonging the moratorium indefinitely. > > > What is a Dredge? > Suction dredges are powered by gas or diesel engines that are mounted on floating pontoons in the river. Attached to the engine is a powerful vacuum hose which the dredger uses to suction up the gravel and sand (sediment) from the bottom of the river. The material passes through a sluice box where heavier gold particles can settle into a series of riffles. The rest of the gravel is simply dumped back into the river. Not only does this destroy fish habitat, it often reintroduces mercury left over from historic mining operations to the food chain, threatening communities downstream and getting into the human food chain. Depending on size, location and density of these machines they can turn a clear running mountain stream into a murky watercourse unfit for swimming. > > # # # > > Editor?s note: for a picture of a suction dredge in action, email request to ctucker at karuk.us > > Also see a dredge in action on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1qwdzQ4fzI and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJYyT2U3iAg > > > > > > > S. Craig Tucker > Klamath Coordinator > Karuk Tribe > cell: 916-207-8294 > home office: 707-839-1982 > > Follow our efforts to restore the Klamath on twitter by visiting http://twitter.com/#!/scraigtucker > > www.klamathrestoration.org > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov Fri May 13 16:28:10 2011 From: Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov (Weseloh, Tom) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 16:28:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F701B74DCC1E@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> Some Byron photos for all to enjoy - if the list accepts them. -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:36 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away All, It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron 1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1190186 bytes Desc: Byron 1.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron and Secretary Babbitt.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 140387 bytes Desc: Byron and Secretary Babbitt.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron and son John 2008.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3107523 bytes Desc: Byron and son John 2008.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron at TAMWG mtg.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 666424 bytes Desc: Byron at TAMWG mtg.jpg URL: From Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov Fri May 13 16:31:33 2011 From: Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov (Weseloh, Tom) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 16:31:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F701B74DCC22@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> More Byron -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:36 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away All, It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron ESC award.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 152384 bytes Desc: Byron ESC award.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron on TAMWG tour with CJ Ed and Jim.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 698761 bytes Desc: Byron on TAMWG tour with CJ Ed and Jim.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron on TAMWG tour with Serge Abbey Kim.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 734224 bytes Desc: Byron on TAMWG tour with Serge Abbey Kim.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron on TAMWG tour.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 728428 bytes Desc: Byron on TAMWG tour.jpg URL: From Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov Fri May 13 16:33:38 2011 From: Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov (Weseloh, Tom) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 16:33:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F701B74DCC24@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> And more... -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:36 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away All, It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron with steelhead.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 385237 bytes Desc: Byron with steelhead.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron's awards Jan 2011.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 943258 bytes Desc: Byron's awards Jan 2011.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron's party 1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 611602 bytes Desc: Byron's party 1.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Young Byron.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 58343 bytes Desc: Young Byron.pdf URL: From Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov Fri May 13 17:07:22 2011 From: Tom.Weseloh at asm.ca.gov (Weseloh, Tom) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 17:07:22 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F701B74DCC46@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> Last batch... -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:36 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away All, It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron's party 2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 293324 bytes Desc: Byron's party 2.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron's party 3.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 128147 bytes Desc: Byron's party 3.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Byron's Trinity steelhead 11-03.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 400343 bytes Desc: Byron's Trinity steelhead 11-03.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Sebring - Byron's car.png Type: image/png Size: 107135 bytes Desc: Sebring - Byron's car.png URL: From snowgoose at pulsarco.com Fri May 13 17:16:44 2011 From: snowgoose at pulsarco.com (Sandy Denn) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 17:16:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away References: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F701B74DCC1E@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> Message-ID: Oh man, he will be sorely missed by all! I have so enjoyed knowing him, even for the short while I had the privilege...Sandy Denn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Weseloh, Tom" To: "Tom Stokely" ; Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 4:28 PM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away Some Byron photos for all to enjoy - if the list accepts them. -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:36 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away All, It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > From wbrock at fs.fed.us Fri May 13 17:49:43 2011 From: wbrock at fs.fed.us (William Brock) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 17:49:43 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron: let's not forget this classic picture Message-ID: There have been several occasions over the past decade when Byron negotiated his way across a crowded room specifically to greet me and shake my hand about something I had recently said or written in an email. I think every one of those interactions occurred when I was about to slip out of the room because I thought nobody would notice. He was very unique that way, and I appreciated every one of his complements. We also talked at length about the San Francisco Giants last fall during their play-off run, a team we love. I'm relieved he got to take great pleasure with their winning the World Series last year to end their 54 year drought. Bill Brock William A. Brock Fisheries/Aquatics Program Mgr. Shasta-Trinity National Forest 3644 Avtech Parkway Redding, CA 96002 wbrock at fs.fed.us 530-226-2430 direct line 530-941-1099 cell 530-226-2485 fax 530-226-2500 switchboard www.fs.fed.us/r5/shastatrinity/ ----- Forwarded by William Brock/R5/USDAFS on 05/13/2011 05:27 PM ----- "Spreck Rosekrans" Sent by: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us 05/21/2007 09:11 AM To cc Subject [env-trinity] Byron with the Governor Do enough surfing and you never know what will pop up. Civic Center Groundbreaking, May 25, 1966. Chairman of the Board of Supervisors Byron W. Leydecker stands at the podium while California Governor Edmund G. Brown stands to his right. Photograph by Ken Molino Photography >From the Marin County archives www.co.marin.ca.us/.../2004fair/flw/flw24.html _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 186582 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat May 14 08:11:09 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 08:11:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River loses a friend: Friends of Trinity River founder Byron Leydecker dies at age 83 Message-ID: Trinity River loses a friend: Friends of Trinity River founder Byron Leydecker dies at age 83 http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18063728 Thadeus Greenson/The Times-Standard Posted: 05/14/2011 02:10:23 AM PDT Click photo to enlarge The Trinity River has lost a giant advocate, but those who knew Byron Leydecker say his legacy will live on in its waters and the salmon that swim through them. Leydecker -- who found himself frustrated at the river's muddy flows on a fishing trip almost 20 years ago and went on to found Friends of the Trinity River, becoming a force in the effort to restore the river's struggling salmon stocks -- died late Thursday surrounded by his family after a brief illness. He was 83. ?Byron Leydecker was a true giant of his time,? said North Coast Congressman Mike Thompson in a statement issued Friday, noting Mill Valley resident's successful banking career before he turned his ?considerable intellect? and connections to conservation. ?His contributions to the state and to the Trinity River cannot be overstated.? After graduating from Stanford University with an economics degree in 1950, Leydecker went on to start Redwood Bancorp and Redwood Bank in 1952 and, later, to serve on the Marin County Board of Supervisors. Retirement in the early 1980s left Leydecker with more time to pursue one of his great passions -- fly-fishing on the Trinity River. But it was a 1992 fishing trip on the river in particular that changed Leydecker's life, and the fate of the river. Fishing downstream from a recently completed Trinity River Restoration Program channel modification project, Leydecker noticed the water was greatly muddied. Soon, his feet were stuck. Eventually, a friend and guide managed to get a raft to Leydecker to pull him from the river. Then-Trinity County planner Tom Stokely recalls getting a call a short time later from Leydecker, who was very mad at having gotten stuck in the middle of something called a river restoration project but was pumping large amounts of mud into a clean river. ?He basically yelled at me for a half an hour,? Stokely recalled with a laugh, adding that the conversation led to Leydecker getting a cease and desist order against the program and, ultimately, led to the hatching of Friends of the Trinity River, which grew to include 1,700 members before closing last year. Over nearly two decades, Stokely said, Leydecker became an indispensable voice in the effort to restore the fishery and get higher flows for the Trinity River. Tom Weseloh, who was the regional manager of California Trout in 1992, said he also received a call from Leydecker after the banker's mud-spoiled fishing trip, but didn't think much of it at the time. ?I would get calls all the time,? he said. ?But very few of (the callers) went on to form a nonprofit and spend 19 years of their life trying to change the way things were and trying to restore a river below a federally financed dam.? Over the coming years, Weseloh came to know Leydecker better than most, serving next to him on the Friends of the Trinity River board of directors. Weseloh said Leydecker -- known for wearing jeans, a button down shirt and sunglasses, whether at meetings or fishing -- was a thoughtful gentleman, valued his friends and family and was extremely polite, though he ?didn't suffer fools easily.? Weseloh said his friend, a former competitive race car driver, was a devoted San Francisco Giants fan, and said he was thankful Leydecker lived to see the team win the World Series last year. Leydecker never had much of an ego, Weseloh said, pointing out that instead of calling himself founder, chairman or president of Friends of the Trinity River, Leydecker preferred the title ?junior clerk trainee.? ?It was never about him,? Weseloh said. ?It was always about restoring the river.? In a debate too often dominated by personal interests and people with axes to grind, Stokely said Leydecker was a man who spoke with passion and without a financial interest or a paycheck. Stokely said that won Leydecker the respect and affection of folks on all sides of the issue -- from conservationists to water and power customers. ?That's pretty unique,? Stokely said. ?He simply did it because he really cared and that gave him tremendous strength. ... People on all sides had the utmost respect for him and when he talked, they listened.? Yurok Tribe policy analyst Troy Fletcher said he didn't always see eye to eye with Leydecker, but always respected him and never questioned his motives. ?He put a lot of time and effort into the Trinity River,? Fletcher said. ?There was one thing that was never in doubt and that was his commitment and his dedication to the Trinity River.? While all agreed Leydecker made a huge impact on the fate of the Trinity River, Stokely said there is more work to be done, noting that Leydecker became very disappointed in the direction the restoration program has taken in recent years, noting he even penned a letter to U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar registering that disappointment a couple of years back. Many said that's Leydecker's legacy -- he was a man who saw something he felt was wrong, and then did everything in his power to right it. ?The world's definitely a better place because Byron was here,? Weseloh said. ?He is definitely one of those people who made a difference.? Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or tgreenson at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20110514__local_leydecker_VIEWER.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4776 bytes Desc: not available URL: From caltrout at sbcglobal.net Sat May 14 11:06:26 2011 From: caltrout at sbcglobal.net (caltrout) Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 11:06:26 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River loses a friend: Friends of TrinityRiver founder Byron Leydecker dies at age 83 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: With all the photos... --------------------------------------- The Times-Standard pg. 1 Trinity River loses a friend: Friends of Trinity River founder Byron Leydecker dies at age 83 http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18063728 Thadeus Greenson/The Times-Standard Posted: 05/14/2011 02:10:23 AM PDT The Trinity River has lost a giant advocate, but those who knew Byron Leydecker say his legacy will live on in its waters and the salmon that swim through them. Leydecker - who found him-self frustrated at the river's muddy flows on a fishing trip almost 20 years ago and went on to found Friends of the Trinity River, be-coming a force in the effort to re-store the river's struggling salmon stocks - died late Thursday night surrounded by his family after a brief illness. He was 83. "Byron Ley-decker was a true giant of his time," North Coast Con-gressman Mike Thompson said in a statement Fri-day, noting Mill Valley resident's successful banking career before he turned his "considerable intel-lect" and connections to conser-vation. "His contributions to the state and to the Trinity River cannot be overstated." After graduating from Stanford University with an economics degree in 1950, Leydecker went on to start Redwood Bancorp and Redwood Bank in 1952 and, later, to serve on the Marin County Board of Supervisors. Retirement in the early 1980s left Leydecker with more time to pursue one of his great passions - fly-fishing on the Trinity River. | See LEYDECKER /A8 _____ SUBMITTED PHOTO Byron Leydecker, right, stands with Herb Burton at a surprise party thrown in Leydecker's honor on the banks of the Trinity River in July 2006. _____ Leydecker LEYDECKER: 'It was never about him. It was always about restoring the river' FROM A1 But it was a 1992 fishing trip on the river in particular that changed Leydecker's life, and the fate of the river. Fishing downstream from a recently completed Trinity River Restoration Program channel modification project, Leydecker noticed the water was greatly muddied. Soon, his feet were stuck. Eventually, a friend and guide managed to get a raft to Leydecker to pull him from the river. Then-Trinity County plan-ner Tom Stokely recalls get-ting a call a short time later from Leydecker, who was very mad at having gotten stuck in the middle of some-thing called a river restora-tion project but was pump-ing large amounts of mud into a clean river. "He basically yelled at me for a half an hour," Stokely recalled with a laugh, adding that the conversation led to Leydecker getting a cease and desist order against the pro-gram and, ultimately, led to the hatching of Friends of the Trinity River, which grew to include 1,700 members before closing last year. Over nearly two decades, Stokely said, Leydecker became an indispensable voice in the effort to restore the fishery and get higher flows for the Trinity River. Tom Weseloh, who was the regional manager of Califor-nia Trout in 1992, said he also received a call from Leydeck-er after the banker's mud-spoiled fishing trip, but didn't think much of it at the time. "I would get calls all the time," he said. "But very few of (the callers) went on to form a nonprofit and spend 19 years of their life trying to change the way things were and try-ing to restore a river below a federally financed dam." Over the coming years, Weseloh came to know Ley-decker better than most, serv-ing next to him on the Friends of the Trinity River board of directors. Weseloh said Leydecker - known for wearing jeans, a button down shirt and sun-glasses, whether at meetings or fishing - was a thought-ful gentleman, valued his friends and family and was extremely polite, though he "didn't suffer fools easily." Weseloh said his friend, a for-mer competitive race car driver, was a devoted San Francisco Giants fan, and said he was thankful Ley-decker lived to see the team win the World Series last year. Leydecker never had much of an ego, Weseloh said, pointing out that instead of calling himself founder, chairman or president of Friends of the Trinity River, Leydecker preferred the title "junior clerk trainee." "It was never about him," Weseloh said. "It was always about restoring the river." In a debate too often domi-nated by personal interests and people with axes to grind, Stokely said Leydecker was a man who spoke with passion and without a financial inter-est or a paycheck. Stokely said that won Leydecker the respect and affection of folks on all sides of the issue - from conservationists to water and power customers. "That's pretty unique," Stokely said. "He simply did it because he really cared and that gave him tremendous strength. ... People on all sides had the utmost respect for him and when he talked, they listened." Yurok Tribe policy analyst Troy Fletcher said he didn't always see eye to eye with Leydecker, but always respected him and never questioned his motives. "He put a lot of time and effort into the Trinity River," Fletcher said. "There was one thing that was never in doubt and that was his commit-ment and his dedication to the Trinity River." While all agreed Leydecker made a huge impact on the fate of the Trinity River, Stokely said there is more work to be done, noting that Leydecker became very disap-pointed in the direction the restoration program has taken in recent years, noting he even penned a letter to U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar registering that disappoint-ment a couple of years back. Many said that's Leydecker's legacy - he was a man who saw something he felt was wrong, and then did every-thing in his power to right it. "The world's definitely a better place because Byron was here," Weseloh said. "He is definitely one of those peo-ple who made a difference." Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or tgreenson at times-standard.com. _____ SUBMITTED PHOTO Then-Marin County Board of Supervisors Chairman Byron Leydecker speaks at a Civic Center groundbreaking on May 25, 1966, as then-Gov. Edmond G. Brown stands to his right. Leydecker went on to spend much of the last 20 years of his life fighting to restore the Trinity River. He died late Thursday at the age of 83. _____ SUBMITTED PHOTO Byron Leydecker holds a chrome bright steelhead caught on the Trinity River in September 2005. Powered by TECNAVIA Copyright (c)2011 Times-Standard 05/14/2011 _____ From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2011 8:11 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River loses a friend: Friends of TrinityRiver founder Byron Leydecker dies at age 83 Trinity River loses a friend: Friends of Trinity River founder Byron Leydecker dies at age 83 http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18063728 Thadeus Greenson/The Times-Standard Posted: 05/14/2011 02:10:23 AM PDT Click photo to enlarge The Trinity River has lost a giant advocate, but those who knew Byron Leydecker say his legacy will live on in its waters and the salmon that swim through them. Leydecker -- who found himself frustrated at the river's muddy flows on a fishing trip almost 20 years ago and went on to found Friends of the Trinity River, becoming a force in the effort to restore the river's struggling salmon stocks -- died late Thursday surrounded by his family after a brief illness. He was 83. "Byron Leydecker was a true giant of his time," said North Coast Congressman Mike Thompson in a statement issued Friday, noting Mill Valley resident's successful banking career before he turned his "considerable intellect" and connections to conservation. "His contributions to the state and to the Trinity River cannot be overstated." After graduating from Stanford University with an economics degree in 1950, Leydecker went on to start Redwood Bancorp and Redwood Bank in 1952 and, later, to serve on the Marin County Board of Supervisors. Retirement in the early 1980s left Leydecker with more time to pursue one of his great passions -- fly-fishing on the Trinity River. But it was a 1992 fishing trip on the river in particular that changed Leydecker's life, and the fate of the river. Fishing downstream from a recently completed Trinity River Restoration Program channel modification project, Leydecker noticed the water was greatly muddied. Soon, his feet were stuck. Eventually, a friend and guide managed to get a raft to Leydecker to pull him from the river. Then-Trinity County planner Tom Stokely recalls getting a call a short time later from Leydecker, who was very mad at having gotten stuck in the middle of something called a river restoration project but was pumping large amounts of mud into a clean river. "He basically yelled at me for a half an hour," Stokely recalled with a laugh, adding that the conversation led to Leydecker getting a cease and desist order against the program and, ultimately, led to the hatching of Friends of the Trinity River, which grew to include 1,700 members before closing last year. Over nearly two decades, Stokely said, Leydecker became an indispensable voice in the effort to restore the fishery and get higher flows for the Trinity River. Tom Weseloh, who was the regional manager of California Trout in 1992, said he also received a call from Leydecker after the banker's mud-spoiled fishing trip, but didn't think much of it at the time. "I would get calls all the time," he said. "But very few of (the callers) went on to form a nonprofit and spend 19 years of their life trying to change the way things were and trying to restore a river below a federally financed dam." Over the coming years, Weseloh came to know Leydecker better than most, serving next to him on the Friends of the Trinity River board of directors. Weseloh said Leydecker -- known for wearing jeans, a button down shirt and sunglasses, whether at meetings or fishing -- was a thoughtful gentleman, valued his friends and family and was extremely polite, though he "didn't suffer fools easily." Weseloh said his friend, a former competitive race car driver, was a devoted San Francisco Giants fan, and said he was thankful Leydecker lived to see the team win the World Series last year. Leydecker never had much of an ego, Weseloh said, pointing out that instead of calling himself founder, chairman or president of Friends of the Trinity River, Leydecker preferred the title "junior clerk trainee." "It was never about him," Weseloh said. "It was always about restoring the river." In a debate too often dominated by personal interests and people with axes to grind, Stokely said Leydecker was a man who spoke with passion and without a financial interest or a paycheck. Stokely said that won Leydecker the respect and affection of folks on all sides of the issue -- from conservationists to water and power customers. "That's pretty unique," Stokely said. "He simply did it because he really cared and that gave him tremendous strength. ... People on all sides had the utmost respect for him and when he talked, they listened." Yurok Tribe policy analyst Troy Fletcher said he didn't always see eye to eye with Leydecker, but always respected him and never questioned his motives. "He put a lot of time and effort into the Trinity River," Fletcher said. "There was one thing that was never in doubt and that was his commitment and his dedication to the Trinity River." While all agreed Leydecker made a huge impact on the fate of the Trinity River, Stokely said there is more work to be done, noting that Leydecker became very disappointed in the direction the restoration program has taken in recent years, noting he even penned a letter to U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar registering that disappointment a couple of years back. Many said that's Leydecker's legacy -- he was a man who saw something he felt was wrong, and then did everything in his power to right it. "The world's definitely a better place because Byron was here," Weseloh said. "He is definitely one of those people who made a difference." Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or tgreenson at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Image_7.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 36718 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Image_8.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4070 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Image_19.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 33947 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Image_20.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 22253 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: none.gif Type: image/gif Size: 49 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20110514__local_leydecker_VIEWER.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4776 bytes Desc: not available URL: From johnleydecker at comcast.net Sat May 14 17:10:07 2011 From: johnleydecker at comcast.net (John Leydecker) Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 17:10:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron' s Passing Message-ID: <00b601cc1294$82303940$8690abc0$@net> We regret to inform you that Byron passed away Thursday evening surrounded by his children and grandchildren. Though the end came too quickly for us all, Byron suffered little pain and his passing was as peaceful and gentle as possible. He expressed heart-felt joy for all those who helped enrich his life. He will be remembered in many capacities by the countless number of people whose lives he touched. Please join us in wishing his spirit everlasting peace and remember him with all the love he shared. We have tentatively scheduled the Memorial Service for him on June 5th at 2:00 p.m. at the Marin Art and Garden Center in Ross, CA. With all our love, Caroline, John, Mark and Criss carolinepalden at gmail.com johnleydecker at gmail.com mark at leydecker.net crisstroast at comcast.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat May 14 18:57:40 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 18:57:40 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal-Friends of Trinity River founder Leydecker dead at 83 Message-ID: Friends of Trinity River founder Leydecker dead at 83 http://www.trinityjournal.com//news/2011-05-11/Front_Page/Friends_of_Trinity_River_founder_Leydecker_dead_at.html Trinity Journal staff Friends of Trinity River founder Byron Leydecker of Mill Valley died late Thursday after a brief illness. He was 83. Trinity County supervisors in January had honored Leydecker for his 18 years of commitment to restoring the Trinity River and his leadership in that effort. Leydecker announced in December he would retire and the organization he founded in 1992 to protect and restore the Trinity River and its tributaries will cease operations. A former California county supervisor who?s been fishing on the Trinity River since the 1930s, Leydecker jumped into the restoration efforts after getting stuck standing in sediment while fishing the Trinity. He filed a cease and desist order with the State Water Quality Control Board over what he felt was a poorly conceived and designed restoration program and soon thereafter founded and began managing the Friends of Trinity River advocacy group. In the January resolution of appreciation, Leydecker?s efforts were cited as being instrumental in helping to obtain Congressional reauthorization of the Trinity River Restoration Program and leading a major grassroots campaign to influence the Interior Secretary?s decision to increase instream flows. Dubbed an unsung hero to countless local fishing guides, rafting owners, and hotel and restaurant owners, Leydecker was commended for an ?unstoppable drive and dedication to ensure that these local business owners and their employees all are able to continue to make a living in this rural part of California.? Noting his work was performed without any compensation and at great personal expense to save a natural resource in a county that has never been his home, the board thanked Leydecker for his personal and professional sacrifices, declaring that wherever his future travels take him, he is ?from this moment forward, an honorary citizen of the County of Trinity.? ?I am a fellow fisherman and want to say that nobody has done more to restore the Trinity River,? said Sup. Roger Jaegel. Leydecker was also presented several other awards for distinguished service by the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, the U.S. House of Representatives and California Legislature. Leydecker in January accepted the accolades on behalf of ?the many, many supporters and volunteers associated with Friends of Trinity River over the years that have made a difference.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Leydecker web.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8843 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun May 15 18:59:32 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 18:59:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] The Control of Nature: Atchafalaya : The New Yorker References: <01E6E588-5732-473F-9CA9-61C0C5A858D7@att.net> Message-ID: <73268B8C-3C6D-402B-AA0F-DAC8791AE5B8@att.net> Even though this isn't about the Trinity River, this is a fascinating read about what's going on with the Mississippi River. It's a chapter from John McPhee's book The Control of Nature about Atchafalaya (but how does one pronounce the word?). http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1987/02/23/1987_02_23_039_TNY_CARDS_000347146 Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From srosekrans at edf.org Sun May 15 19:39:20 2011 From: srosekrans at edf.org (Spreck Rosekrans) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 22:39:20 -0400 Subject: [env-trinity] The Control of Nature: Atchafalaya : The New Yorker In-Reply-To: <73268B8C-3C6D-402B-AA0F-DAC8791AE5B8@att.net> Message-ID: <9B3402DBFFD40E42A4858B233E3BE9C90B835EA112@ny-mail> Also "Rising Tide" re the 1927 flood may be of interest. ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Stokely [mailto:tstokely at att.net] Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 09:59 PM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] The Control of Nature: Atchafalaya : The New Yorker Even though this isn't about the Trinity River, this is a fascinating read about what's going on with the Mississippi River. It's a chapter from John McPhee's book The Control of Nature about Atchafalaya (but how does one pronounce the word?). http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1987/02/23/1987_02_23_039_TNY_CARDS_000347146 Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spillwayguy at gmail.com Sun May 15 21:01:57 2011 From: spillwayguy at gmail.com (Tim Stroshane) Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 21:01:57 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] The Control of Nature: Atchafalaya : The New Yorker In-Reply-To: <9B3402DBFFD40E42A4858B233E3BE9C90B835EA112@ny-mail> References: <9B3402DBFFD40E42A4858B233E3BE9C90B835EA112@ny-mail> Message-ID: Both great books. the bayou, I believe, is pronounced with the initial A silent. "Choffalaya" roughly. Perhaps there's someone on the list from Louisiana that knows for certain? Tim Stroshane On May 15, 2011, at 19:39, Spreck Rosekrans wrote: > > > Also "Rising Tide" re the 1927 flood may be of interest. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Tom Stokely [mailto:tstokely at att.net] > Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 09:59 PM > To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > Subject: [env-trinity] The Control of Nature: Atchafalaya : The New Yorker > > Even though this isn't about the Trinity River, this is a fascinating read about what's going on with the Mississippi River. It's a chapter from John McPhee's book The Control of Nature about Atchafalaya (but how does one pronounce the word?). > > http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1987/02/23/1987_02_23_039_TNY_CARDS_000347146 > > Tom Stokely > Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact > California Water Impact Network > V/FAX 530-926-9727 > Cell 530-524-0315 > tstokely at att.net > http://www.c-win.org > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Mon May 16 07:30:39 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 07:30:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] The Control of Nature: Atchafalaya : The New Yorker In-Reply-To: <73268B8C-3C6D-402B-AA0F-DAC8791AE5B8@att.net> References: <01E6E588-5732-473F-9CA9-61C0C5A858D7@att.net> <73268B8C-3C6D-402B-AA0F-DAC8791AE5B8@att.net> Message-ID: <20110516143050.FGBA26484.omta02.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Daryl_Van_Dyke at fws.gov Mon May 16 12:33:21 2011 From: Daryl_Van_Dyke at fws.gov (Daryl_Van_Dyke at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 12:33:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] env-trinity Digest, Vol 88, Issue 19 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Roughly " 'Chaff-fu-lie-ya ".. or ' ah-Chaff-uh-lie-ya' depending on where y'at. Daryl ___________________________________________________ Daryl Van Dyke GIS Analyst - Klamath Strategic Habitat Conservation Team Dept of the Interior, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service AFWO, Region 8 707-825-5153 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From srosekrans at edf.org Mon May 16 15:15:55 2011 From: srosekrans at edf.org (Spreck Rosekrans) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 18:15:55 -0400 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker - an inspirational leader who cared about California's rivers Message-ID: <9B3402DBFFD40E42A4858B233E3BE9C90B836E252E@ny-mail> See Byron Leydecker - an inspirational leader who cared about California's rivers Spreck Rosekrans www.edf.org http://blogs.edf.org/waterfront/ 415-293-6082 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsutton at tccanal.com Mon May 16 17:16:37 2011 From: jsutton at tccanal.com (Jeff Sutton) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 17:16:37 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <004d01cc1427$b901ba40$2b052ec0$@com> As a representative of a large contingency of CVP Water Contractors, you would think a relationship between Byron and myself would have been very unlikely, or at least somewhat strained. To the contrary, I had the absolute pleasure and privilege of getting to know Byron over the past three years, and was welcomed by him and drawn to him from day one (a recurrent theme in all of the notes I have read mourning his loss, speaking volumes on the character of the man). We traded e-mails, had chats on the phone, shared articles and stories of interest, strategized together on occasion, and discussed and debated areas of agreement and disagreement. I have great respect for the work he did for the Trinity River, and the process itself, and greatly appreciated his understanding and appreciation for my perspective as a water user as well. His passion, intelligence, wit, and unique way of communicating will be sorely missed. I have thought of him as a great new friend that I was just really getting to know, that was taken away much too soon. I consider myself fortunate to have spent the limited amount of time that I did with Byron. The Trinity River had no better friend than Byron Leydecker, his passion and memory will live on in the river restoration efforts that will be carried on by all of the folks he inspired. Jeffrey P. Sutton General Manager Tehama Colusa Canal Authority 5513 Highway 162 P. O. Box 1025 Willows, CA 95988 (530) 934-2125 (w) (530) 934-2355 (f) (530) 301-1030 (c) jsutton at tccanal.com -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:36 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away All, It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1325 / Virus Database: 1500/3635 - Release Date: 05/13/11 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1375 / Virus Database: 1500/3642 - Release Date: 05/16/11 From joewmccarthy at comcast.net Mon May 16 19:21:44 2011 From: joewmccarthy at comcast.net (Joseph W. McCarthy) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 19:21:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1982FF7F8AE14C8E987311A51B7C6120@joelaptop> I was shocked and upset when I received the news. With the irreplaceable Byron gone, I feel that things are out of balance. Byron was the editor and publisher of the Friends of the Trinity River (FOTR) newsletter. Byron prolifically produced the newsletter and I read each one in detail. In one letter, Byron mentioned that there was a TAMWG vacancy and urged members of the FOTR to apply. Byron's blurb in the newsletter is the reason I am a member of TAMWG. I deeply regret that I am unable to attend tomorrow's TAMWG meeting. My guess is, there will be a great deal of discussion regarding memorializing Byron. Joe -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:36 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away All, It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity From ema.berol at yahoo.com Mon May 16 21:13:47 2011 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emelia Berol) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 21:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG agenda for May 17 In-Reply-To: <5842F48F7D7643D9B8E41ADE0AD45F5B@arnPC> References: <5842F48F7D7643D9B8E41ADE0AD45F5B@arnPC> Message-ID: <599482.34379.qm@web46213.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> I am very sorry I will not be able to attend the meeting tomorrow, and I concur with Joseph's statement re Byron, I was shocked and upset when I received the news. With the irreplaceable Byron gone, I feel that things are out of balance. Byron was the editor and publisher of the Friends of the Trinity River (FOTR) newsletter. Byron prolifically produced the newsletter and I read each one in detail. In one letter, Byron mentioned that there was a TAMWG vacancy and urged members of the FOTR to apply. Byron's blurb in the newsletter is the reason I am a member of TAMWG. I deeply regret that I am unable to attend tomorrow's TAMWG meeting. My guess is, there will be a great deal of discussion regarding memorializing Byron. Joe Best wishes to all TAMWG members, Peace, Emelia Berol ________________________________ From: Arnold Whitridge To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Tue, May 10, 2011 8:25:43 AM Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG agenda for May 17 Here's the agenda for the May 17th meeting of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, Arnold Whitridge, TAMWG chair 530 623-6688 ProposedAgenda TRINITY ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP Tuesday, May 17, 2011 Victorian Inn large conference room, Weaverville, CA Time Presentation, Discussion, and/or Action on: Presenter 1. 9:00 Adopt agenda; approve April minutes 2. 9:10 Open forum; public comment 3. 9:30 TMC Chair report Brian Person 4. 10:00 Observations during peak releases TRRP staff 5. 10:30 Temperature issues, minimum pool criteria, & Tom Stokely, February 23 letter to TMC from Paul Fujitani Rod Wittler 6. 11:30 Acting Executive Director?s report Jennifer Faler 12:00 lunch 7. 1:00 2012 TRRP work plan and budget Jennifer Faler 8. 2:30 Policies for work in tributary watersheds Solicitor guidance if available by meeting time 9. 3:00 Designated Federal Officer topics Randy Brown 10. 3:30 Goals & suggestions for joint TAMWG-TMC meeting June 29th 11. 4:00 Tentative date and agenda topics for next regular meeting 5:00 Adjourn . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From snowgoose at pulsarco.com Tue May 17 08:53:35 2011 From: snowgoose at pulsarco.com (Sandy Denn) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 08:53:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG agenda for May 17 References: <5842F48F7D7643D9B8E41ADE0AD45F5B@arnPC> Message-ID: <415B16A334FA405F9B80F5D620E5E5C8@acer6e395d0925> Good morning Arnold; I apologize for the very late notice, but I am unable to attend this morning. I had some oral surgery yesterday, and did not anticipate it would be this sore, and preclude eating solid foods for a couple of days! Then when it was storming as hard as it is over here, I didn't feel comfortable with the possibility oif encountering a road closure and/or delays due to possible mudslides. I hope and pray you got a quorum and the effort isn't in vain. Sandy. ----- Original Message ----- From: Arnold Whitridge To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 8:25 AM Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG agenda for May 17 Here's the agenda for the May 17th meeting of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, Arnold Whitridge, TAMWG chair 530 623-6688 Proposed Agenda TRINITY ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP Tuesday, May 17, 2011 Victorian Inn large conference room, Weaverville, CA Time Presentation, Discussion, and/or Action on: Presenter 1. 9:00 Adopt agenda; approve April minutes 2. 9:10 Open forum; public comment 3. 9:30 TMC Chair report Brian Person 4. 10:00 Observations during peak releases TRRP staff 5. 10:30 Temperature issues, minimum pool criteria, & Tom Stokely, February 23 letter to TMC from Paul Fujitani Rod Wittler 6. 11:30 Acting Executive Director's report Jennifer Faler 12:00 lunch 7. 1:00 2012 TRRP work plan and budget Jennifer Faler 8. 2:30 Policies for work in tributary watersheds Solicitor guidance if available by meeting time 9. 3:00 Designated Federal Officer topics Randy Brown 10. 3:30 Goals & suggestions for joint TAMWG-TMC meeting June 29th 11. 4:00 Tentative date and agenda topics for next regular meeting 5:00 Adjourn . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From snowgoose at pulsarco.com Tue May 17 08:54:44 2011 From: snowgoose at pulsarco.com (Sandy Denn) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 08:54:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away References: <004d01cc1427$b901ba40$2b052ec0$@com> Message-ID: <1F09F8B173D14DD881A29A5A9C08A8C3@acer6e395d0925> Very well said Jeff! Sandy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Sutton" To: "'Tom Stokely'" ; Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 5:16 PM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away > As a representative of a large contingency of CVP Water Contractors, you > would think a relationship between Byron and myself would have been very > unlikely, or at least somewhat strained. To the contrary, I had the > absolute pleasure and privilege of getting to know Byron over the past > three > years, and was welcomed by him and drawn to him from day one (a recurrent > theme in all of the notes I have read mourning his loss, speaking volumes > on > the character of the man). We traded e-mails, had chats on the phone, > shared articles and stories of interest, strategized together on occasion, > and discussed and debated areas of agreement and disagreement. I have > great > respect for the work he did for the Trinity River, and the process itself, > and greatly appreciated his understanding and appreciation for my > perspective as a water user as well. His passion, intelligence, wit, and > unique way of communicating will be sorely missed. I have thought of him > as > a great new friend that I was just really getting to know, that was taken > away much too soon. I consider myself fortunate to have spent the limited > amount of time that I did with Byron. The Trinity River had no better > friend than Byron Leydecker, his passion and memory will live on in the > river restoration efforts that will be carried on by all of the folks he > inspired. > > > Jeffrey P. Sutton > General Manager > Tehama Colusa Canal Authority > 5513 Highway 162 > P. O. Box 1025 > Willows, CA 95988 > (530) 934-2125 (w) > (530) 934-2355 (f) > (530) 301-1030 (c) > jsutton at tccanal.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom > Stokely > Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 11:36 AM > To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker has passed away > > All, > > It is with great sadness that I report to you that Byron Leydecker passed > away this morning. He died in comfort with his family. > > He was a giant of a man and certainly left his mark on the Trinity River > Restoration Program as well as several of us personally. > > Byron led life to the fullest and had no regrets. > > More will be forthcoming from Byron's family. > > Tom Stokely > Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact > California Water Impact Network > V/FAX 530-926-9727 > Cell 530-524-0315 > tstokely at att.net > http://www.c-win.org > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1325 / Virus Database: 1500/3635 - Release Date: 05/13/11 > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1375 / Virus Database: 1500/3642 - Release Date: 05/16/11 > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > From tstokely at att.net Tue May 17 11:45:48 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 11:45:48 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron's Memorial 3 pm, not 2 pm Message-ID: <2B75A720-8F96-4164-BFA9-28E6C01F12D1@att.net> I have been informed by Byron's daughter that Byron's Memorial will be at 3 pm on June 5th at Marin Art & Garden Center. not at 2 as previously stated in various e-mails and news articles. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue May 17 19:37:20 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 19:37:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] A New Salmon Water Now Video: A Strange Season (dedicated to Byron Leydecker) References: <512586E5-2B28-49A2-A430-661E57FA59DA@davidnesmith.com> Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: > From: Bruce Tokars > Date: May 17, 2011 12:38:38 PM PDT > To: Bruce Tokars > Subject: A New SWN Video: A Strange Season > > Greetings -- > > Once again we have taken a look at the current state of affairs concerning salmon and shake our head in disbelief. If you have been following the news then you already know about the two main subjects of our new video, a lawsuit filed to stop the salmon season and the continuing saga of the BDCP. Here is the information brief about the video. Please share and embed if you agree with us that this really is a strange season. > > Watch it on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1B6I43vMag&hd=1 or Watch it on Vimeo: http://www.vimeo.com/23662404 > > A Strange Season (14:46) > > We seem to be in the middle of a very a strange season. > > There has been a glimmer of hope that the numbers of wild salmon are finally showing signs that they are starting to rebound. Enough so that the Federal agencies who determine if there are enough fish in the system to allow a full fishing season told both recreational and commercial salmon fishermen to go fishing. Finally some good news! But wait, there?s suddenly more to this story. > > A group of Central Valley irrigators, who supply water to agriculture and industrial customers, has filed suit in Federal court to reverse the government?s go fishing decision. They seek to ban anyone from catching salmon this year. > > This video explores this strange turn of events and also takes a look at the latest twists and turns impacting efforts to fix the Delta. > > As part of the National Academy of Science?s review of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan?s (BDCP) work and recommendations, the NAS has pointed out a significant flaw in the BDCP blueprint. > > This Salmon Water Now video looks at the continuing BDCP controversy and the stop-the-fishing lawsuit. Once again we point to the Westlands Water District as a player in both stories (even though they are not listed on the lawsuit). We feature a portion of Westland?s General Manager Tom Birmingham?s comments made at a recent Congressional field hearing in Fresno. > > We?re doing our part to keep information flowing about the seemingly never-ending struggle over water, wild salmon, and California?s fragile ecosystem. We think it matters and we encourage the sharing of this and other Salmon Water Now videos to help people understand the changing and challenging dynamics that are in play. > > Watch it on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1B6I43vMag&hd=1 > > Watch it on Vimeo: http://www.vimeo.com/23662404 > > > > This Salmon Water Now production is dedicated to the memory of Byron Leydecker. > > Mr. Leydecker founded Friends of the Trinity River and was a tireless advocate to protect the river and restore the river's struggling salmon stocks. > > Salmon Water Now was honored to have had his enthusiastic support of our production efforts. But more importantly, the Trinity river and the salmon that run through it, are better off because he was here when they needed him the most. > > > Bruce Tokars > www.salmonwaternow.org > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed May 18 12:02:01 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 12:02:01 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Friends of Trinity River founder Leydecker dead at 83 Message-ID: Friends of Trinity River founder Leydecker dead at 83 http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-05-18/Front_Page/Friends_of_Trinity_River_founder_Leydecker_dead_at.html TRINITY JOURNAL STAFF Byron Leydecker, shown here along the Trinity River in January, passed away Thursday at age 83. PHIL NELSON | THE TRINITY JOURNAL Friends of Trinity River founder Byron Leydecker of Mill Valley died late Thursday after a brief illness. He was 83. Leydecker?s family said he passed away surrounded by his children and grandchildren. A service has tentatively beenscheduledfor 3pm.June 5 at the Marin Art and Garden Center in Ross, Calif. Trinity County supervisors in January had honored Leydecker for his 18 years of commitment to restoring the Trinity River and his leadership in that effort. Leydecker announced in December he would retire and the organization he founded in 1992 to protect and restore the Trinity River and its tributaries would cease operations. ?He had a tremendous influence over events in the Trinity River, far more than most people realize, and he was also a hell of a guy,? said Tom Stokely, a member of the Friends of Trinity River board and retired Trinity County senior resource planner. ?He had a very positive influence on the river.? A former California county supervisor who?d been fishing on the Trinity River since the 1930s, Leydecker jumped into the restoration efforts after getting stuck standing in sediment caused by a mechanical restoration project while fishing the Trinity. He called Stokely to complain, and Stokely told him who to have a lawyer write to shut down the projects. Leydecker filed a cease and desist order with the State Water Quality Control Board over what he felt was a poorly conceived and designed restoration program and soon thereafter founded and began managing the Friends of Trinity River advocacy group. ?The river was like chocolate milk and people were upset,? Stokely recalled, adding that Leydecker forced the mechanical restoration projects to wait to be coupled with higher river flows. Friends of Trinity River has also worked with the restoration program and was instrumental in obtaining funding for the bridge replacements that have allowed higher Trinity River flows. In the January resolution of appreciation, Leydecker?s efforts were cited as being instrumental in helping to obtain congressional reauthorization of the Trinity River Restoration Program and leading a major grassroots campaign to influence the Interior Secretary?s decision to increase instream flows. Dubbed an unsung hero to countless local fishing guides, rafting owners, and hotel and restaurant owners, Leydecker was commended for an ?unstoppable drive and dedication to ensure that these local business owners and their employees all are able to continue to make a living in this rural part of California.? Noting his work was performed without any compensation and at great personal expense to save a natural resource in a county that has never been his home, the board thanked Leydecker for his personal and professional sacrifices, declaring that wherever his future travels take him, he is ?from this moment forward, an honorary citizen of the County of Trinity.? ?I am a fellow fisherman and want to say that nobody has done more to restore the Trinity River,? said Sup. Roger Jaegel. Leydecker was also presented several other awards for distinguished service by the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, the U.S. House of Representatives and California Legislature. Leydecker in January accepted the accolades on behalf of ?the many, many supporters and volunteers associated with Friends of Trinity River over the years that have made a difference.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 4p1.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8275 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed May 18 16:04:27 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 16:04:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Marin Independent Journal Message-ID: <3460B131-16A2-4E41-B72B-E9F3DDF60C98@att.net> Former Marin supervisor Byron Leydecker dies at 84 http://www.marinij.com/tiburonbelvedere/ci_18060573 By Rob Rogers Marin Independent Journal Posted: 05/14/2011 04:52:00 PM PDT Former Marin County supervisor Byron Leydecker died Thursday, May 12, 2011. He was instrumental protecting Northern California rivers. Byron Waite Leydecker, a former Marin County supervisor and bank owner who spent the plast 18 years of his life working to restore the Trinity River, died at his Mill Valley home Thursday. He was 84. "Byron was a tireless fighter for fish and rivers, as much so as probably anybody you would find anywhere," said Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, who visited Mr. Leydecker last week. "He especially fought for the Trinity River, which was nearest to his heart." Born Aug. 28, 1927, in Oakland, Mr. Leydecker moved to Modesto with his family while he was in the ninth grade. After graduating from high school in 1945, Mr. Leydecker enlisted in the Navy. He saw duty on the USS Iowa as a seaman and cruised into Tokyo Bay shortly after the Japanese surrender. Mr. Leydecker enrolled in Modesto Junior College after his discharge and later attended Stanford University, where he graduated in 1950 with a degree in economics. Before he could begin his career, however, Mr. Leydecker became California's first veteran to be called up for service in the Korean War. Drafted into the Army, Mr. Leydecker became assistant to a public relations officer at Camp Detrick, Md. After a brief stint as a securities analyst, Mr. Leydecker joined Crocker-Anglo National Bank in 1953 and was appointed as assistant manager to the bank's Chico office in 1954. In 1958, Mr. Leydecker became manager and assistant vice president at the bank's office in San Rafael. He Advertisement immediately became active in many local organizations, including the Marin County Humane Society, San Rafael Military Academy, Marin Industrial Development Foundation and Marin Music Chest. Although he was shifted to Crocker-Anglo's Stockton branch in 1961, Mr. Leydecker resigned from that bank the next year and returned to San Rafael as president of the newly formed Redwood Bank. In 1963, at the age of 36, Mr.Leydecker was appointed by Gov. Pat Brown to succeed the late Walter R. Castro as the San Rafael representative on the Marin County Board of Supervisors. In 1964, Mr. Leydecker won election to his supervisorial seat after a hard-fought campaign against San Rafael Mayor John F. McInnis. As both a bank president and county supervisor, Mr. Leydecker was known as an efficient, intelligent manager who had little patience for those who could not keep up with him, and little hesitation in expressing his frustration. "Often his sharp words offended those with soft skin," wrote Independent Journal columnist Rick Lyttle in 1966. "But just as often they served to prod things along much faster than the normal bureaucratic shuffle." Mr. Leydecker served as chairman of the Board of Supervisors in 1966, but announced that year that he would not seek re-election to his seat. He was a member of the California delegation in support of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy's presidential campaign in 1968, and supported Sen. Edward Kennedy's presidential campaigns in 1980 and 1984, holding fundraisers for the candidate in his Tiburon home. It was while fishing on the Trinity River in 1991 that Mr. Leydecker found himself stuck in mud created by the then-ongoing Trinity River Restoration Program. Angered by the incident, Mr. Leydecker obtained a cease-and-desist order against the program from the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board and formed his own nonprofit organization, the Friends of the Trinity River, in 1992. Thanks in part to Mr. Leydecker's efforts and influence, the group helped persuade Congress and various federal agencies to restore the river's historic flows. In January, Mr. Leydecker was honored for his efforts by the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, the U.S. House of Representatives and the California Legislature. He was also named an honorary citizen of Trinity County. Mr. Leydecker married Mary Elizabeth Kraft, a journalist who later became a reporter for the Marin Independent Journal, in 1951. The couple divorced in 1969, and Mrs. Leydecker died in 1999. Mr. Leydecker married Patricia A. Lombard in 1969 and adopted her two children. The couple divorced in 1983. He was predeceased by his son David in 1985 and is survived by two sons, John Lydecker of San Rafael and Mark Lydecker of Aspen, Colo.; two daughters, Caroline (Lama Palden) Alioto of San Rafael and Criss Troast of Nantucket, Mass.; and eight grandchildren. The family is planning a memorial service. http://www.marinij.com/tiburonbelvedere/ci_18060573 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20110514__nmij0515leydecker01~1_100.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 30026 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 19 08:49:26 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 08:49:26 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding Record Searchlight- Trinity River advocate Byron Leydecker dies Message-ID: <3D0CF968-44C2-4174-B616-1495974A6152@att.net> Trinity River advocate Byron Leydecker dies http://www.redding.com/news/2011/may/18/a-river-ran-through-his-life/ By Dylan Darling Posted May 18, 2011 at 11:56 p.m. Leydecker founded Friends of Trinity River to return water diversions and vet restoration. One bad fishing day turned into nearly two decades of fighting to revive the Trinity River for a man who would become known as the waterway's champion. A retired banker from Marin County, Byron Leydecker, who died last week at 83, had been a fixture at river restoration meetings since 1992. During those meetings he earned the respect of other people, whether they agreed with his views or not, said Tom Stokely, a longtime friend. "Byron was there as a volunteer," Stokely said. "He went on his own time and his own expense. He was there because he really cared." Stokely found out how much Leydecker cared about the river, which flows through Trinity County and combines with the Klamath River on its way to the Pacific Ocean, after Leydecker's bad fishing day 19 years ago. That day what was intended to be a restoration project caused the river to run dark with mud. "Literally, the Trinity River was flowing like chocolate milk," Stokely said. So Leydecker found a phone number for Stokely, who was a planner for Trinity County's Natural Resources Department at the time. "He called me up and yelled at me for about a half-hour," Stokely said. Stokely explained that the project was done by the Trinity River Restoration Program, a multi-agency group formed to restore the river, and they talked about ways Leydecker could become involved with its planning. Later that year, Leydecker founded the Friends of Trinity River, a nonprofit organization aimed at returning water diversions to the river and vetting restoration plans, Stokely said. The group continued until a month ago, when Leydecker dissolved it as his health waned. The Friends of Trinity River's accomplishments include spurring the federal government to combine flow revival and restoration projects, prompting the reduction of diversions from the river to the Sacramento River and earning legislative support, Stokely said. Stokely joined the board of the Friends of Trinity River two years ago after retiring from Trinity County. As a staunch advocate for the Trinity River, Leydecker was involved in some heated debates about the river but had a style that earned him the respect of even the people with whom he was at odds, Stokely said. Those include Jeff Sutton, general manager of the Tehama Colusa Canal Authority. "I have great respect for the work he did for the Trinity River, and the process itself, and greatly appreciated his understanding and appreciation for my perspective as a water user as well," Sutton wrote in email sent to a listserv of 200 people interested in the river. "His passion, intelligence, wit, and unique way of communicating will be sorely missed." Leydecker, who lived in Mill Valley, fished the Trinity River since the 1930s and became focused on it in his last 20 years. "He probably did as much for the Trinity River as anybody who lived there," Stokely said. Leydecker earned an economics degree from Stanford University in 1950 and then served in the Army for two years before starting a career in banking. He also served as a Marin County supervisor from 1963 to 1966. He retired in 1981. Leydecker is survived by sons John Leydecker of San Rafael and Mark Leydecker of Aspen, Colo., and daughters Caroline "Lama Palden" Alioto of San Rafael and Criss Troast of Nantucket, Mass., as well as eight grandchildren, according to the Marin Independent Journal. He was preceded in death by his son David in 1985 and former wife Mary Elizabeth Kraft in 1999. The couple married in 1951 and divorced in 1969. A memorial for Leydecker is set for 3 p.m. June 5 at the Marin Art and Garden Center in Ross. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 220110518234645003_t160.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 8983 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri May 20 15:15:35 2011 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 14:15:35 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?iso-8859-1?q?_CBB=3A_Salmon_History=3A_Centuries_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Ago_Juveniles_Entered_Columbia_Estuary_Younger=2C_Smaller_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Than_Today=92s_Fish?= Message-ID: <20110520151539.BB6EB0C@m0004619.ppops.net> THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com May 20, 2011 -- Issue No. 576 * Salmon History: Centuries Ago Juveniles Entered Columbia Estuary Younger, Smaller Than Today?s Fish Chinook salmon reared in the upper stretches of the Columbia River watershed 250 to 500 years ago used to leave their freshwater habitat and enter the estuary ? and possibly even the Pacific Ocean ? when they were smaller and younger than most of their contemporary counterparts. Researchers tracking the life history of salmon long before dams were built on the Columbia say the finding suggests that fisheries leaders may need to manage for a diversity of life histories. Results of the research have been published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries. ?The Columbia River estuary is an amazingly productive system and there clearly are advantages for fish to enter into that environment,? said Jessica Miller, an Oregon State University ecologist and lead author on the study. ?Yet today fish remain in fresh water for a longer period of time ? possibly because they must navigate past the dams, and because river flows during their ocean migration have been reduced with the development of the hydropower system. ?Chinook salmon have a more diverse portfolio than other salmon species, which may be one reason some of their populations are doing so well,? Miller added. ?Managing the resource to retain that diversity seems like a logical strategy.? ?We know there are advantages for the salmon to reach a certain size before entering the ocean, especially in avoiding prey,? Miller noted. ?But there may be long-term advantages to having individuals that migrate at a diversity of sizes.? To learn more about ancient salmon runs, the researchers worked with the Confederated Tribes of the Colville in Washington, where they obtained the skeletal remains of salmon from a former archaeological site just downriver from Grand Coulee Dam. The fish, which the scientists dated to 250-500 years ago, were in an area of the Columbia River which is no longer accessible to migrating fish because of the dams. One goal of the research was to see if fish that used to go upstream of Chief Joseph Dam ? the farthest upriver that salmon and steelhead return ? had different characteristics than present-day fish. To do this, they looked at the bony structure within the salmon?s ears called an ?otolith,? which accretes calcium carbonate and forms growth rings. By examining the growth rings and isotopes within otoliths, scientists can ascertain the age of a fish, where it lived and sometimes what it has eaten. ?It?s pretty amazing that we can look at the otolith of a 500-year-old fish and determine which river it likely originated in and at what size it entered marine waters,? said Miller, an assistant professor of fisheries and wildlife who works out of OSU?s Hatfield Marine Science Center in Newport. They do this by analyzing the ratio of strontium-to-calcium isotopes in the otolith. A high ratio indicates a fish has been living in salt water, while a lower ratio suggests recent freshwater history. They also can examine two isotopes of strontium, which can provide information on the river of origin. ?We can also estimate where in the river system they were, because as you move east to west, the rocks get younger and the strontium values change,? Miller said. ?In most cases, the isotopic signature is extraordinarily revealing.? Miller also was lead author on another study, published in the Marine Ecology Progress Series, which examined diversity of fish runs in modern populations. Focusing on Central Valley (California) chinook salmon, the study determined that adult fish typically had begun their juvenile migration in two ?pulses.? A majority of adults had begun their seaward migration as larger juveniles (75 millimeters or longer), which typically leave rivers in mid-April to May. But the adult sample also contained fish that had begun their emigration as smaller fish (less than 55 mm). Though fewer in numbers, these smaller fish were still significant and typically left rivers in February and March. ?In the Central Valley, the vast majority of hatchery production is focused on larger juveniles, whereas most of the naturally produced fish appear to emigrate at a smaller size,? Miller said. ?Similar to the variation in adult run timing ? which may protect runs against catastrophic floods, drought or disease ? variation in the timing of juvenile migration to the ocean may be important for long-term survival.? Other researchers on the Canadian Journal of Fisheries study include Virginia Butler, Portland State University; Charles Simenstad, University of Washington; David Backus, Williams College; and Adam Kent, OSU. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Fri May 20 17:27:35 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:27:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Salmon History: Centuries Ago Juveniles Entered Columbia Estuary Younger, Smaller Than =?iso-8859-1?Q?Today=92s?= Fish In-Reply-To: <20110520151539.BB6EB0C@m0004619.ppops.net> References: <20110520151539.BB6EB0C@m0004619.ppops.net> Message-ID: <20110521002741.ALE11963.omta01.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Bill_Pinnix at fws.gov Tue May 24 12:41:44 2011 From: Bill_Pinnix at fws.gov (Bill_Pinnix at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 12:41:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Restoration Program Juvenile Salmonid Monitoring Program In-Season Update Message-ID: Hello, Please find the attached Trinity River Restoration Program Juvenile Salmonid Monitoring Program In-Season Update for May 24, 2011. If you have any questions regarding this update, please don't hesitate to contact me. Thank you, Bill (See attached file: TRRP_catch_update_2011.pdf) William Pinnix USFWS, AFWO 1655 Heindon Rd Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-7201 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRRP_catch_update_2011.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 182538 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue May 24 16:05:25 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 16:05:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Opposition to H.R. 1837- A Political End Run Around State Water Rights and National Environmental Protections Preventing Equitable Share of Water to Protect National Interests References: Message-ID: <95C12A9F-5103-4D00-BC12-84E4C1D8F791@att.net> H.R. 1837 (Nunes) is scheduled for a hearing on June 2nd in the House Subcommittee on Water and Power. Attached is a letter sent out from 16 consumer, fishing and conservation groups opposing H.R. 1837. This bill will largely benefit junior federal water contractors?especially Westlands Water District?by giving them permanent contracts for water provided through the federal Central Valley Project where tax dollars and subsidies already have benefited these corporate irrigators for over the last 40 years. The bill would provide these Westside irrigators with permanent water allocations that will impact other water users throughout the state. This publicly developed water could then be sold to the highest bidder at some later date. Westlands et. al. would reap the windfall profits not the taxpayer who paid for the water development. Equally the bill will eviscerate environmental and water quality protective measures to ensure a viable fishery throughout the west coast. Additionally it will scrap millions of federal and state dollars spent to try to remedy damage by the federal Central Valley Project. The bill will also significantly impact water conservation measures that have been critical in providing much needed water supplies especially to Southern California. On May 16th, Westlands and a few other water districts participated in Congressman Nunes? press conference regarding his new bill - http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/05/16/2390160/nunes-pushes-bill-to-boost-water.html This appears to violate the ?blood oath? that Westlands and others signed at Senator Feinstein?s request, in which water interests pledged to oppose legislation designed to block or modify the San Joaquin River restoration agreement. Footnote #1 in the attached letter summarizes in brief some of the potential consequences of this bill on the BDCP, state law, the San Joaquin River, the CVPIA and other water users. For example, this bill would pre-empt state water rights, making senior water users in the Delta and upstream responsible for protecting the Bay-Delta, and capping the contribution of junior water users at the levels provided in the 1994 Bay-Delta Accord. That agreement, of course, predates the collapse of the ecosystem, the listing of several species, recent scientific analysis and the dramatic increase in pumping by the CVP and SWP during the 2000s. In short, this legislation would have disastrous impacts on the Bay-Delta, the Trinity River, restoration of the San Joaquin River, the salmon fishery, senior water rights holders, Sacramento Valley and Delta farmers, and the prospects for BDCP and other efforts to make progress in the Delta. You can also download the letter on the website of the California Water Impact Network at https://www.c-win.org/opposition-hr-1837-political-end-run-around-state-water-rights-and-national-environmental-protection If you have any questions please email or call. Thank you for your consideration. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Coalition Opposition Letter to HR 1837 Nunes (R).pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 737911 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue May 24 17:22:37 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 17:22:37 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Salmon Water Now Video on HR 1837 Message-ID: <31601148-D459-4703-9047-86F97BB72FC0@att.net> Bruce Tokars came out with a short video on HR 1837. You can view it at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me6qEpSgack&hd=1 Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 26 08:24:20 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 08:24:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle- Byron Leydecker, former Marin supervisor, dies Message-ID: <74F09438-A527-4FB5-A70A-7DC6AAC62788@att.net> Byron Leydecker, former Marin supervisor, dies Peter Fimrite, Chronicle Staff Writer http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/05/26/BAQ41JGRTH.DTL Thursday, May 26, 2011 Byron Waite Leydecker, a former bank executive and Marin County supervisor who helped stop development in the Marin Headlands and, for nearly two decades, drove the restoration and protection of his beloved Trinity River, died May 12 in his home in Mill Valley. Mr. Leydecker, who was 83, had been battling lung and liver cancer. Mr. Leydecker was born in Oakland on Aug. 28, 1927. He served briefly on the battleship Iowa at the end of World War II before enrolling in Stanford University, where he graduated in 1950 with a degree in economics. During the Korean War, he served as a public information officer in the U.S. Army in Washington. He worked briefly as a securities analyst and in 1953 got a job at Chico's Anglo National Bank, which later became Crocker Bank. By the time he left, he had become the bank's youngest-ever vice president. In 1962 he helped found Redwood Bank, where he was chairman of the board and chief executive officer until the bank was sold in 1981. In 1963, Gov. Edmund G. "Pat" Brown appointed Mr. Leydecker to the Marin County Board of Supervisors. He won re-election in 1964. As a supervisor he fought a proposed development known as Marincello, which would have allowed construction of 20,000 homes in the Marin Headlands. Never shy about speaking his mind, Mr. Leydecker could be a gruff taskmaster. He may have sometimes lacked diplomacy, but he was amazingly adept at getting what he wanted, said his friends and colleagues. He started racing cars in the 1970s and, driving a modified Porsche, won the 1977 Northern California championship of the prestigious Sports Car Club of America circuit. The construction of Trinity Dam and Lewiston Dam in the 1960s and diversions of water as part of the Central Valley Project were sore spots to Mr. Leydecker, who had fished the Trinity in the 1930s when it was nearly pristine. He decided to take action in 1991, when a channel improvement project by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation choked the Trinity River with silt. It was so bad that Mr. Leydecker got stuck in the mud on a side channel while he was fly fishing. "He was madder than a wet hen," said his friend Tom Stokely, the water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network. "He called me up and he must have yelled at me for a half hour. Then he said, 'I've got money. I can hire a lawyer.' It was the beginning of a long and wonderful relationship." Mr. Leydecker forced the bureau to stop digging along the river and in 1992 founded the nonprofit Friends of the Trinity River. The group fought to establish minimum annual water flows, improve fish habitat and enhance the riparian ecosystem. "He was an authentic champion for rivers and fish, but especially the Trinity River," said Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, who chairs the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee. Mr. Leydecker, who always wore a pressed button-down shirt with blue jeans and cowboy boots, fought until the very end for Trinity River improvements and against water diversions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. "He gave so much of his time and effort that it would be remiss as his friend for me not to continue that effort," said Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, who once spent several days hiking and rafting the river with Mr. Leydecker. "He had a sense of romance about big rivers and what they bring to a society." He is survived by sons John Leydecker of San Rafael and Mark Leydecker of Aspen, Colo.; daughters Caroline "Lama Palden" Alioto of San Rafael and Criss Troast of Nantucket, Mass.; and eight grandchildren. A memorial service will be held June 5 at 3 p.m. at Marin Art & Garden Center, 30 Sir Francis Drake Blvd., in Ross. Donations may be sent to the California Water Impact Network, 808 Romero Canyon Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93108. E-mail Peter Fimrite at pfimrite at sfchronicle.com. Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/05/25/BAQ41JGRTH.DTL#ixzz1NTJswTio -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 1 10:41:27 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 10:41:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding Record Searchlight- Tom Stokely: Water bill is bad for the north state References: Message-ID: <3450572A-67E7-4BBB-B541-F8061C86D4E1@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2011/jun/01/tom-stokely-water-bill-is-bad-for-the-north/ Tom Stokely: Water bill is bad for the north state Tom Stokely Posted June 1, 2011 at midnight Westlands and its political allies are at it again. They want to permanently take our water. Take a stand and urge Congressman Wally Herger to oppose HR 1837. Rep. Devin Nunes' bill entitled, The San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act (HR 1837) will be heard Thursday in the Water & Power Subcommittee of the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee. The bill is bad for Northern California's groundwater, farms, cities, reservoirs, fish, wildlife and rivers. Northern California politicians, regardless of party affiliation, should oppose this bill. This bill will largely benefit junior federal water contractors ? especially Westlands Water District ? by giving them permanent contracts for water paid for by huge tax subsidies. Restrictions on the pumping of Northern California surface and groundwater though the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta would be basically eliminated, making it easier to deplete Shasta and Trinity reservoirs and transfer Sacramento Valley groundwater south, especially during times of drought when we need it most locally. The authors claim these permanent water allocations are needed because of high unemployment in the San Joaquin Valley. Nunes claims this high unemployment is the result of bureaucrats out to take away "their" water because of legal restrictions designed to protect Northern California's senior water rights and heritage salmon runs. Economists' have debunked this false claim. Those claims are part of a long-standing disinformation campaign by certain irrigators to rewrite history and move their current junior water contacts to the front of the line. They incorrectly blame water for fisheries and fishermen for unemployment that is actually the result of the housing and construction crisis, as well as fallowed acres on the San Joaquin Valley's west side because of growing soil/salt/selenium impairment. Professor Jeffrey Michael, associate professor at the University of Pacific's Eberhardt School of Business, explains how farm job increases out-pace non-farm job increases and that the foreclosure crisis and housing crash are at the heart of the San Joaquin Valley's economic problems on his blog. More water won't produce more jobs in the San Joaquin Valley, but it will produce unemployment in northern California from the Bay-Delta northward. More water won't produce more jobs in the San Joaquin Valley, but it will produce unemployment in Northern California from the Bay-Delta northward. There is plenty of water this year. All Central Valley Project irrigators north of the Delta and most south of the Delta received a 100 percent allocation. Only the more junior westside farmers such as Westlands got an 80 percent contract allocation, which is still their largest allocation since 1998. Despite claims to the contrary, Delta pumping restrictions currently allow more water to be pumped from the Delta than was pumped prior to 1997. All of the water this year and the fishery protections of the past three years have resulted in reopening of California salmon sport and commercial fisheries and the return of jobs along the Sacramento River as well as up and down the West Coast. The National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies of Science performed an exhaustive review of the pumping restrictions, concluding that protections for salmon, steelhead and sturgeon were "scientifically justified." The full NRC report can be found at online here. This ill-conceived legislation will not solve California's water crisis. HR 1837 would have disastrous impacts on the Bay-Delta, the Sacramento River salmon fishery, reservoir recreation, Sacramento Valley and Delta farms, and the prospects of making peace in California's Water Wars. It would increase water deliveries to Westlands at the expense of Sacramento Valley Central Valley Project agricultural service water contractors such as the Tehama Colusa Canal Authority, which recently filed an area-of-origin lawsuit against the Bureau of Reclamation for similar reasons. Water for Westlands was always intended to be limited to surplus supplies only. The bill also removes significant barriers to water transfers from the Sacramento Valley that are part of a plan to raid the Tuscan Aquifer of its groundwater. Butte, Colusa, Glenn and Tehama counties are located above the Tuscan Aquifer, which is central to all the state and federal plans to provide more water for users south of the Bay Delta. If HR 1837 is passed, we can see a repeat of 1994, when groundwater sales brokered by the Department of Water Resources under the so-called Drought Water Bank coincided with drastic water level drops and pump strandings in numerous irrigation, domestic and municipal wells in Butte County. Local politicians such as Congressman Wally Herger should vigorously oppose HR 1837 because it is bad for his constituents and bad for California. The answer to California's water problems is not increased water deliveries from Northern California. Instead, California's future lies with maintaining the priority of existing water rights, limiting water deliveries and public subsidies to toxic lands such as those in Westlands, as well as reduced reliance on the Delta's waters from Northern California. Tom Stokely is water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network. He lives in Mount Shasta. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Wed Jun 1 10:54:22 2011 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 10:54:22 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding Record Searchlight- Tom Stokely: Water bill is bad for the north state In-Reply-To: <3450572A-67E7-4BBB-B541-F8061C86D4E1@att.net> References: <3450572A-67E7-4BBB-B541-F8061C86D4E1@att.net> Message-ID: Dan Bacher Tom Stokely has written an oustanding article for www.redding.com urging Representative Wally Herger to oppose HR 1837, Representative Devin Nunes' horrible bill. HR 1837 is bad for Northern California's groundwater, farms, cities, reservoirs, fish, wildlife and rivers. Great job, Tom! ? Tom Stokely: Water bill is bad for the north state www.redding.com Westlands and its political allies are at it again. They want to permanently take our water. Take a stand and urge Congressman Wally Herger to oppose HR 1837. a few seconds ago ? Like ? ? Share On Jun 1, 2011, at 10:41 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > http://www.redding.com/news/2011/jun/01/tom-stokely-water-bill-is- > bad-for-the-north/ > Tom Stokely: Water bill is bad for the north state > Tom Stokely > > Posted June 1, 2011 at midnight > > Westlands and its political allies are at it again. They want to > permanently take our water. Take a stand and urge Congressman Wally > Herger to oppose HR 1837. > > Rep. Devin Nunes' bill entitled, The San Joaquin Valley Water > Reliability Act (HR 1837) will be heard Thursday in the Water & > Power Subcommittee of the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee. > The bill is bad for Northern California's groundwater, farms, > cities, reservoirs, fish, wildlife and rivers. Northern California > politicians, regardless of party affiliation, should oppose this bill. > > This bill will largely benefit junior federal water contractors ? > especially Westlands Water District ? by giving them permanent > contracts for water paid for by huge tax subsidies. Restrictions on > the pumping of Northern California surface and groundwater though > the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta would be basically eliminated, > making it easier to deplete Shasta and Trinity reservoirs and > transfer Sacramento Valley groundwater south, especially during > times of drought when we need it most locally. > > The authors claim these permanent water allocations are needed > because of high unemployment in the San Joaquin Valley. Nunes > claims this high unemployment is the result of bureaucrats out to > take away "their" water because of legal restrictions designed to > protect Northern California's senior water rights and heritage > salmon runs. Economists' have debunked this false claim. > > Those claims are part of a long-standing disinformation campaign by > certain irrigators to rewrite history and move their current junior > water contacts to the front of the line. They incorrectly blame > water for fisheries and fishermen for unemployment that is actually > the result of the housing and construction crisis, as well as > fallowed acres on the San Joaquin Valley's west side because of > growing soil/salt/selenium impairment. > > Professor Jeffrey Michael, associate professor at the University of > Pacific's Eberhardt School of Business, explains how farm job > increases out-pace non-farm job increases and that the foreclosure > crisis and housing crash are at the heart of the San Joaquin > Valley's economic problems on his blog. More water won't produce > more jobs in the San Joaquin Valley, but it will produce > unemployment in northern California from the Bay-Delta northward. > More water won't produce more jobs in the San Joaquin Valley, but > it will produce unemployment in Northern California from the Bay- > Delta northward. > > There is plenty of water this year. All Central Valley Project > irrigators north of the Delta and most south of the Delta received > a 100 percent allocation. Only the more junior westside farmers > such as Westlands got an 80 percent contract allocation, which is > still their largest allocation since 1998. Despite claims to the > contrary, Delta pumping restrictions currently allow more water to > be pumped from the Delta than was pumped prior to 1997. > > All of the water this year and the fishery protections of the past > three years have resulted in reopening of California salmon sport > and commercial fisheries and the return of jobs along the > Sacramento River as well as up and down the West Coast. The > National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies of > Science performed an exhaustive review of the pumping restrictions, > concluding that protections for salmon, steelhead and sturgeon were > "scientifically justified." The full NRC report can be found at > online here. > > This ill-conceived legislation will not solve California's water > crisis. HR 1837 would have disastrous impacts on the Bay-Delta, the > Sacramento River salmon fishery, reservoir recreation, Sacramento > Valley and Delta farms, and the prospects of making peace in > California's Water Wars. It would increase water deliveries to > Westlands at the expense of Sacramento Valley Central Valley > Project agricultural service water contractors such as the Tehama > Colusa Canal Authority, which recently filed an area-of-origin > lawsuit against the Bureau of Reclamation for similar reasons. > Water for Westlands was always intended to be limited to surplus > supplies only. > > The bill also removes significant barriers to water transfers from > the Sacramento Valley that are part of a plan to raid the Tuscan > Aquifer of its groundwater. Butte, Colusa, Glenn and Tehama > counties are located above the Tuscan Aquifer, which is central to > all the state and federal plans to provide more water for users > south of the Bay Delta. If HR 1837 is passed, we can see a repeat > of 1994, when groundwater sales brokered by the Department of Water > Resources under the so-called Drought Water Bank coincided with > drastic water level drops and pump strandings in numerous > irrigation, domestic and municipal wells in Butte County. > > Local politicians such as Congressman Wally Herger should > vigorously oppose HR 1837 because it is bad for his constituents > and bad for California. The answer to California's water problems > is not increased water deliveries from Northern California. > Instead, California's future lies with maintaining the priority of > existing water rights, limiting water deliveries and public > subsidies to toxic lands such as those in Westlands, as well as > reduced reliance on the Delta's waters from Northern California. > > Tom Stokely is water policy analyst for the California Water Impact > Network. He lives in Mount Shasta. > > > Tom Stokely > Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact > California Water Impact Network > V/FAX 530-926-9727 > Cell 530-524-0315 > tstokely at att.net > http://www.c-win.org > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: safe_image.php.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1510 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 1 10:44:27 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 10:44:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] River loses its greatest champion- Trinity Journal Editorial Message-ID: <6BD8C2BA-6196-4A74-AA50-3744AB298AC8@att.net> River loses its greatest champion http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-06-01/Opinion/River_loses_its_greatest_champion.html The Trinity River lost its greatest champion last month when Byron Waite Leydecker, 83, passed away. Mr. Leydecker had been a fan of the river since his early childhood in the 1930s. But it was a pivotal trip in the early 1990s when he got stuck in the mud while fly fishing that turned him into the Trinity River?s leading champion. Irate over how the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was treating the river, choking it with silt during channel improvement projects, Mr. Leydecker formed a group which would eventually become the influential Friends of Trinity River. The group put a stop to channel projects until full environmental reports were completed, which ultimately led to the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision which restored flows to roughly half of pre-dam levels. Friends of Trinity River also worked with the restoration program and was instrumental in obtaining funding for the bridge replacements that have allowed higher Trinity River flows and critical springtime releases. And while he always deferred credit, leading the charge on these issues for nearly two decades was Mr. Leydecker. The river itself, and all friends of the Trinity River, will miss his leadership. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 1 10:42:45 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 10:42:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Editorial-Trinity River faces continuing challenges Message-ID: Trinity River faces continuing challenges http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-06-01/Opinion/Trinity_River_faces_continuing_challenges.html House resolution a danger to river, wrong in so many ways A fter years of seeing excessive amounts of water shipped to the Central Valley, Trinity Lake and the Trinity River are facing a new challenge in the form of House Resolution 1837, the San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act. Sponsored by Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, the bill aims to provide San Joaquin Valley farmers a steady and consistent stream of water for their fields. Unfortunately, in doing so the bill seeks to roll back water quality protections and water rights laws. It?s hard to see the bill as anything but a blatant power grab to provide guaranteed water to those who right now possess only junior water rights while exempting those exports from state and federal laws enacted to ensure a fair distribution of water. Equally disturbing would be the rollback of water quality rules and Delta restoration efforts, further hurting any chances of reviving a dwindling salmon population. Opponents point out that it will cost millions of dollars and destroy jobs throughout Northern California, Oregon and Washington states because of its impacts on the commercial and recreational fishing industries and surrounding communities. Likewise, the bill dynamites state water right protections, including tribal trust obligations (including those to the Hoopa Valley tribe), and elevates those with junior water rights to the front of the line. All that water has to come from somewhere. Anyone want to bet they won?t be looking at increasing Trinity River exports to the Central Valley? The bill was referred to the House Subcommittee on Water and Power on May 24. That would be a good place for it to die. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jun 2 15:47:39 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 15:47:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Business Casual for Byron Leydecker's Memorial Service this Sunday Message-ID: <94F8AA73-2630-4A80-8727-FEFA942B5A8B@att.net> I have been informed that "business casual" is the appropriate attire for Byron's Memorial this Sunday, June 5 at 3 pm at the Marin Art and Garden Center, 30 Sir Francis Drake Blvd, Ross, CA. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From PManza at usbr.gov Thu Jun 9 16:18:31 2011 From: PManza at usbr.gov (Manza, Peggy L) Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 17:18:31 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River Date time from (cfs) to (cfs) 6-25-11 0100 2000 1940 6-26-11 0100 1940 1880 6-27-11 0100 1880 1820 6-28-11 0100 1820 1770 6-29-11 0100 1770 1710 6-30-11 0100 1710 1660 7-01-11 0100 1660 1610 7-02-11 0100 1610 1560 7-03-11 0100 1560 1500 7-04-11 0100 1500 1460 7-05-11 0100 1460 1410 7-06-11 0100 1410 1360 7-07-11 0100 1360 1310 7-08-11 0100 1310 1250 7-09-11 0100 1250 1200 7-14-11 0100 1200 1150 7-15-11 0100 1150 1100 7-16-11 0100 1100 1050 7-17-11 0100 1050 1000 7-18-11 0100 1000 950 7-19-11 0100 950 900 7-20-11 0100 900 850 7-21-11 0100 850 800 7-22-11 0100 800 750 7-23-11 0100 750 700 7-28-11 0100 700 650 7-29-11 0100 650 600 7-30-11 0100 600 550 7-31-11 0100 550 500 8-01-11 0100 500 450 Ordered by: Peggy Manza Note: Trinity ROD pulse flow ramp down schedule -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jun 10 10:05:44 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 10:05:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Salmon Water Now latest video- Blueprint for Bullies References: Message-ID: <32B327F5-20CB-45D4-8E2A-FCE6BEB5CBCB@att.net> Check out Salmon Water Now's latest video about HR 1837 on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MCPPrhG8do&feature=youtube_gdata_player Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Fri Jun 10 16:39:17 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:39:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] WATER RIGHT PETITION FOR LONG TERM TRANSFER FROM DWR TO WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT Message-ID: <4DF2AB25.7050803@tcrcd.net> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: notice_long term.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 89974 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Fri Jun 10 16:39:17 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:39:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] WATER RIGHT PETITION FOR LONG TERM TRANSFER FROM DWR TO WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT Message-ID: <4DF2AB25.7050803@tcrcd.net> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: notice_long term.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 89974 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Sun Jun 12 14:57:09 2011 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:57:09 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] NOAA Says May Showed Transition From La Nina To El Nino/Southern Oscillation Neutral Message-ID: <20110612145714.34E542B5@m0004617.ppops.net> THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com June 10, 2011 Issue No. 578 * NOAA Says May Showed Transition From La Nina To El Nino/Southern Oscillation Neutral NOAA?s Climate Prediction Center this week said a transition from La Ni?a to El Nino/Southern Oscillation-Neutral conditions occurred during May 2011 as indicated by generally small sea surface temperature anomalies across the equatorial Pacific Ocean. The subsurface oceanic heat content remained elevated, but relatively constant during the month. Consistent with other transitions to ENSO-neutral conditions, the atmospheric circulation anomalies continued to show some features consistent with La Ni?a, albeit at weaker strength. Current observed trends, along with forecasts from a majority of the ENSO models, indicate ENSO-neutral will continue through the Northern Hemisphere summer 2011. Thereafter, most models and all multi-model forecasts predict ENSO-neutral to continue through the remainder of 2011. However, the status of ENSO beyond the Northern Hemisphere summer remains more uncertain due to lower model forecast skill at longer lead times, particularly during this time of year. La Ni?a is defined as cooler than normal sea-surface temperatures in the central and eastern tropical Pacific ocean that impact global weather patterns. La Ni?a conditions recur every few years and can persist for as long as two years. El Ni?o and La Ni?a are extreme phases of a naturally occurring climate cycle referred to as El Ni?o/Southern Oscillation. Both terms refer to large-scale changes in sea-surface temperature across the eastern tropical Pacific. Usually, sea-surface readings off South America's west coast range from the 60s to 70s F, while they exceed 80 degrees F in the "warm pool" located in the central and western Pacific. This warm pool expands to cover the tropics during El Ni?o, but during La Ni?a, the easterly trade winds strengthen and cold upwelling along the equator and the West coast of South America intensifies. Sea-surface temperatures along the equator can fall as much as 7 degrees F below normal. El Ni?o and La Ni?a result from interaction between the surface of the ocean and the atmosphere in the tropical Pacific. Changes in the ocean impact the atmosphere and climate patterns around the globe. In turn, changes in the atmosphere impact the ocean temperatures and currents. The system oscillates between warm (El Ni?o) to neutral (or cold La Ni?a) conditions with an on average every 3-4 years. Typically, a La Ni?a is preceded by a buildup of cooler-than-normal subsurface waters in the tropical Pacific. Eastward-moving atmospheric and oceanic waves help bring the cold water to the surface through a complex series of events still being studied. In time, the easterly trade winds strengthen, cold upwelling off Peru and Ecuador intensifies, and sea-surface temperatures drop below normal. During the 1988- 89 La Ni?a, SSTs fell to as much as 4 degrees C (7 degrees F) below normal. Both La Ni?a and El Ni?o tend to peak during the Northern Hemisphere winter. La Ni?a often features drier than normal conditions in the Southwest in late summer through the subsequent winter. Drier than normal conditions also typically occur in the Central Plains in the fall and in the Southeast in the winter. In contrast, the Pacific Northwest is more likely to be wetter than normal in the late fall and early winter with the presence of a well-established La Ni?a. Additionally, on average La Ni?a winters are warmer than normal in the Southeast and colder than normal in the Northwest. El Ni?o and La Ni?a occur on average every 3 to 5 years. However, in the historical record the interval between events has varied from 2 to 7 years. According to the National Centers for Environmental Prediction, this century's previous La Ni?as began in 1903, 1906, 1909, 1916, 1924, 1928, 1938, 1950, 1954, 1964, 1970, 1973, 1975, 1988, and 1995. These events typically continued into the following spring. Since 1975, La Ni?as have been only half as frequent as El Ni?os La Ni?a conditions typically last approximately 9-12 months. Some episodes may persist for as long as two years. Contrasting El Ni?o and La Ni?a winters, the jet stream over the United States is considerably different. During El Ni?o the jet stream is oriented from west to east over the northern Gulf of Mexico and northern Florida. Thus this region is most susceptible to severe weather. During La Ni?a the jet stream extends from the central Rockies east- northeastward to the eastern Great Lakes. Thus severe weather is likely to be further north and west during La Ni?a than El Ni?o. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 14 07:34:17 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:34:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Democrats work to rally opposition to Calif. rule rewrite effort Message-ID: <1FC9F2F3-E25E-4C5F-9C1D-43CF33545957@att.net> Democrats work to rally opposition to Calif. rule rewrite effort (06/14/2011) Anne C. Mulkern, E&E reporter http://www.eenews.net/ More people need to realize the dangers of a GOP bill on California water and exert pressure to stop it, a key House Democrat said yesterday. H.R. 1837 could set a dangerous precedent and affect water users not just in California but in any state, said Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-Calif.), ranking member of the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. "I'm hoping people wake up and put pressure on this House of Representatives to not allow it to pass the full committee and then to the floor because it is detrimental," Napolitano said. The comments followed a subcommittee hearing on the bill from Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.). Napolitano urged some of the hearing witnesses to write editorials opposing the measure and said that she is trying to stir opposition. The hearing was the second on the measure. During a June 3 examination of the bill, Democrats said they needed a second hearing to present other witnesses who would be affected by the law including "fishermen, delta farmers, urban communities and many others" (E&E Daily, June 3). Republicans rejected that argument, calling it a stall tactic. Subcommittee Chairman Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) was the sole GOP panel member at yesterday's hearing. "Not a single new argument has been raised," McClintock said, adding that all of the Democratic claims about the bill were "debunked" at the first hearing. Called the "San Joaquin Water Reliability Act," Nunes' bill would repeal a 2009 law on central California water uses and replace it with 1994 rules from an agreement known as the Bay-Delta Accord. The measure would set compliance with the Endangered Species Act to that year. The current governance on water in the region became law when the San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) was included in a 2009 omnibus lands bill. Feinstein's measure enacted a 2006 court agreement on water flows, salmon and endangered species in the San Joaquin River. The Natural Resources Defense Council and others had sued the Interior and Commerce departments over rules in place since the early 1990s. Under the court settlement, new limits were placed on the amounts of water certain farmers can take for irrigation. Nunes' bill, in addition to stripping out those restrictions, would eliminate an existing tiered pricing system for water use. It would change water contracts so they last 40 years instead of 25, and they could be automatically renewed. It also would eliminate a requirement that new and renewed contracts must undergo an environmental impact study. Asked about Napolitano's efforts at rallying opposition, Nunes spokesman Andrew House said Nunes does not anticipate problems with passage. "We think we have the bipartisan votes to get out of markup," House said. "There's no question about that." There should also be sufficient votes for committee and floor passage, House said. Feinstein and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) both have written letters opposing the bill. Democrats hope that means the measure will ultimately die in the upper chamber even if it passes the House. "With both our senators [from California] in the Senate against it, if it does get pass the House, I'm assuming that the senators will make sure that it's blocked on the Senate side," Napolitano said. There are many ways to enact a law, House said, noting that Feinstein's 2009 measure was included in an omnibus bill. "There are a lot of options to legislate before the end of the year," House said, and Nunes and Republicans will be "looking for opportunities to make law." Charges of favoritism All witnesses at yesterday's event opposed the bill. David Bitts, president of the Eureka, Calif.-based Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations, said the measure could devastate some fisheries. "It looks to us like this bill would lead to destruction of the salmon resource in California and therefore the destruction of our fisheries," Bitts said, adding that it could hurt fisheries that seek other breeds as well. Too much has changed since 1994 in California's Bay Delta region that "trying to nail down a remedy based on the '94 accords is obsolete and will not work," testified Will Steele, regional administrator of Seattle-based National Marine Fisheries Service. Democratic panel members criticized the bill as an attempt to favor agricultural users in the Fresno-based Westlands Water District. "It is very difficult to describe the extremism and the radicalism of this legislation," said Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), who is not on the Natural Resources Committee but joined the panel for the hearing. There is a great body of law governing Western water, Miller said, and "to now come in and to set off this explosion and decide that all of this law will be pushed aside, that one district with an absolute entitlement mentality will be able to take whatever they deem to be necessary for them to take, and that everybody else will pay the price for that." Miller and McClintock battled over the latter's statement that Democratic charges about the bill had been "debunked." "Somebody better read the testimony before making those statements," Miller said, referring to the June 3 hearing witness statements. McClintock snapped back at Miller that "if he would have attended the previous hearing he would have heard that all of those arguments were previously debunked." McClintock also said that "no legislation will clear this subcommittee that undermines local area water rights." After the hearing Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.) said McClintock is in "jeopardy" with his own constituents because he backs a measure that would "steal" water from mountain and northern regions and give it to users in Westlands Water District. "This is a modern day version of Chinatown," Garamendi added after the hearing, referring to Roman Polanski's film-noir classic that revolves around a water scam in 1930s-era Los Angeles. McClintock's office declined to comment on Garamendi's statement. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Tue Jun 14 12:23:42 2011 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:23:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Federal Register for June 29 2011 Message-ID: Hi Folks, A joint meeting with the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) and Trinity Management Council (TMC) is scheduled to meet June 29, 2011. Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 113 (Monday, June 13, 2011)] [Notices] [Page 34248] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ http://www.gpo.gov/] [FR Doc No: 2011-14523] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2011-N116; 81331-1334-8TWG-W4] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a joint TAMWG and TMC meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG-TMC will meet from 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Wednesday, June 29, 2011. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Trinity Alps Resort, 1750 Trinity Alps Road, Trinity Center, CA 96091. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Randy A. Brown, TAMWG Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Robin Schrock, Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623-1800; e-mail: rschrock at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a joint meeting of the TAMWG-TMC. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: Interests and perspectives of members of the TMC and TAMWG, Possible improvements in operations and implementation of the TRRP, Possible improvements in TAMWG-TMC relations. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. Dated: June 7, 2011. Randy A. Brown, Deputy Field Supervisor, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2011-14523 Filed 6-10-11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 14 13:19:11 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:19:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Editorial: Fisheries have equal claim to water Message-ID: <0EFE10F9-5169-46F9-B385-1FD200CED951@att.net> Editorial: Fisheries have equal claim to water THE HERALD'S VIEW The Monterey County Herald Posted: 06/09/2011 05:28:35 AM PDT Updated: 06/09/2011 10:30:51 AM PDT http://www.montereyherald.com/editorials/ci_18237441?nclick_check=1 You've seen the signs ? "Farms, not fish!" ? when the TV cameras are about to roll. But it isn't likely you've seen any proclaiming "Fish, not subsidized water for corporate ag," which is because there haven't been many signs like that. Fishermen can be just as appealing as farmers, but agriculture continues to win the political and public relations fight over the limited amount of California water that both of them need. Those who should be supporting the fishing interests?including the people and institutions of the Central Coast?should start doing that more loudly and more clearly. A bill now in the House, H.R. 1837 by tea party favorite Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, would set the clock back to 1994 for environmental regulations imposed on giant water traffickers such as the Westlands Water District and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The Nunes bill attempts to kill a landmark 2006 agreement that transformed decades of disagreement into a model plan to restore and protect the San Joaquin Delta and the San Joaquin River, key components of California's water infrastructure. It would take considerable power from the state and pass it to the federal government, and would effectively allow the state's irrigators to pump water even when it jeopardized huge populations of fish?fish that are needed to support the commercial and sport fisheries on California's coastline and other species that are needed to keep coastal ecosystems in balance. Fish stocks, including smelt, shad and young striped bass, have declined to record lows in the past five years, largely because of wholesale export of water out of the Delta. In May alone, state and federal water project pumps on the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta killed nearly 15,000 spring-run Chinook salmon, which could be a record. A coalition of salmon conservation groups wrote to Congress last month that the Nunes bill "is a radical attempt to place the water demands of some of California's most junior water rights holders ahead of all other California interests in a blatant water grab. "It is intended to significantly enrich a small group of land owners (and water agencies) by allowing them to purchase the maximum amount of below-market, taxpayer-subsidized, government-developed water in order to irrigate some highly problematic or marginal lands, or to profit by reselling that water at market rates." Nunes, who has become a master at misleading rhetoric, said his bill is merely meant to protect agriculture. "We give up water and no one else gives up water, and that time has come to an end," he said, in all apparent seriousness. Is irrigated agriculture important to California? Absolutely. Anyone who questions that doesn't understand the California economy. Should ag's access to reasonably priced water be protected? Again, absolutely. But when the supply of anything is limited, competition ensues, and no industry, not even agriculture, is entitled to more than anyone else with legitimate claims. It's time for ag to stop playing the victim, and for supporters of fishing and the environment to stop being so quiet. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 14 13:18:05 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:18:05 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Yurok Tribe Opposes Devin Nunes' HR 1837 Message-ID: <1AFE7D07-9405-49AC-B489-6BCDDC7E5894@att.net> Yurok Tribe Opposes Devin Nunes' HR 1837 by Dan Bacher Friday Jun 10th, 2011 7:32 PM http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/06/10/18681533.php "Enactment of H.R. 1837 will undermine the ability of the Bureau of Reclamation to meet its federal trust obligation to protect, preserve and enhance the trust resources of the Yurok Tribe," said Thomas O'Rourke, Chairman of the Yurok Tribe. Photo of Yurok Tribal Chair, Thomas O'Rourke, at a direct action protest against the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative in Fort Bragg on July 21, 2010. Photo by Dan Bacher. 640_img_9718_1.jpg Yurok Tribe Opposes Devin Nunes' HR 1837 by Dan Bacher California's largest Indian Tribe, the Yurok Tribe, has joined the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, Modoc Nation, commercial fishing groups, recreational angling organizations, Delta farmers, conservation groups and environmental justice organizations in strongly opposing the San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act (HR 1837) sponsored by Representative Devin Nunes (D-California). Thomas O'Rourke, Chairman of the Yurok Tribal Council, slammed the bill for favoring a few corporate agribusiness interests to the detriment of fish, fishermen, Tribes and the environment in a letter sent on June 10 to Congressional Leaders. These include Doc Hastings, Chair of the Natural Resources Committee, Tom McClintock, Chair of the Water and Power Subcommittee, and Grace Napolitano, Ranking Democratic Member, Water and Power Subcommittee. "This bill is designed to benefit select CVP (Central Valley Project) water contractors at the expense of State and Federal water quality protection, State water rights laws and Endangered Species Act requirements," said O'Rourke. "Enactment of this bill will undermine the intent and authorities of the CVPIA (Central Valley Project Improvement Act) and seriously threaten the federal government's ability to meet its trust responsibilities to the Yurok Tribe. Enactment will extend Congressional guarantee for the delivery of water to select CVP contractors waiving senior water rights protections and tribal trust obligations to the Yurok Tribe." O'Rourke emphasized that the bill "will result in severe economic impacts" to the fishing communities of Northern California, including the Yurok Tribe of the Klamath River. "The primary claim of the supporters of the bill is that the CVPIA has significantly reduced water diversions from the Delta," said O'Rourke. "In fact, since CVPIA was passed in 1992, water diversions from the Delta have increased. Increased south of Delta pumping over the last decade has contributed to the drastic decline of Sacramento River Chinook salmon populations, resulting in state wide ocean commercial and sport salmon season closures in 2009 and 2010." H.R. 1837 will reduce the mandates of the 1992 CVPIA to protect the fishery and the San Francisco Bay and Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, according to O'Rourke. This historic legislation made fish and wildlife a purpose of the Central Valley Project for the first time in history. "These reductions will further threaten the recovery of endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon and other native fish species and slow the economic recovery of dependent fishing communities," said O'Rourke. If enacted, the Nunes' bill threatens to undermine the landmark 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision (ROD), and limits the ability of the Bureau of Reclamation to manage the Trinity River Division of the CVP to provide reliable quantities and quality of water for in-river restoration flow releases, O'Rourke stated. "The Yurok Tribe is the single largest harvester of Trinity River fall Chinook salmon and is dependent upon its fishery to meet our subsistence, economic and ceremonial needs," said O'Rourke. "Enactment of H.R. 1837 will undermine the ability of the Bureau of Reclamation to meet its federal trust obligation to protect, preserve and enhance the trust resources of the Yurok Tribe." "This bill benefits a select group of CVP water contractors at the expense of public and tribal trust resources of Califomia," he concluded. "We encourage you to defeat this bill and support the ongoing consensus-based efforts in the Bay Delta Conservation Planning process, uphold the San Joaquin River restoration settlement and enforce critical species protections under the federal Endangered Species Act." The Yurok Tribe sent the letter at a time when one of the largest fish kills in California history is taking place. New federal data show that the CVP and State Water Project (SWP) pumps in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta have "salvaged" more than 6 million Sacramento splittail in the past six weeks and more than 51,000 imperiled spring-run chinook this year. The daily totals of fish "salvaged" in the pumps can be found at: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/delta/data/salvage. ?Over the past six weeks, the outlook for Sacramento splittail has gone from bad to dramatically worse,? said Jeff Miller, a conservation advocate for the Center. ?Delta pumping operations may have wiped out a significant portion of the juvenile splittail in what could have been a good year for rebuilding the population.? Miller said the splittail were formerly protected as a threatened species but illegally stripped of protection in 2003. The Fish and Wildlife Service last fall made a controversial determination that the species does not warrant protection, despite the fact that numbers of splittail found in annual California Department of Fish and Game surveys from 2002 to 2010 has been the lowest recorded since surveys began in 1967. I applaud the Yurok Tribe for officially opposing Devin Nunes' HR 1837. To allow this legislation to pass would result in the extinction of Sacramento River chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other imperiled Delta fish populations, as well as devastating Trinity and Klamath River salmon populations. For more information about the Yurok Tribe, go to: http://www.yuroktribe.org. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 640_img_9718_1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 172534 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 14 13:22:38 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:22:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Aquanomics-Water will not help Mendota's unemployed Message-ID: <34689DE9-E2BC-47BE-8AEF-665EA3C13590@att.net> http://www.aguanomics.com/2011/06/water-will-not-help-mendotas-unemployed.html Tuesday, June 14 Water will not help Mendota's unemployed Deirdre Des Jardins of California Water Research Associates argues that fallowed land around Mendota (the town famous for its 40% unemployment) is the result of salinity build-up, not a lack of water for irrigation. Westlands has argued that places like Mendota are suffering without water and cited "high" unemployment and fallowing as a reason to export more water from the Delta to Westlands. That argument is hollow, since more water would not help Mendota. It would help farmers in other places, but they are not suffering as much from unemployment and fallowing. (They probably want to switch to water-intensive tomato production.) For the fulle report, see: http://www.scribd.com/doc/56909617/Mendota-Evidence-that-soil-and-groundwater-salinization-is-the-predominant-cause-of-land-fallowing -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: salt.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 19239 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 15 14:09:50 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 14:09:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Wally Herger goes on record against HR 1837! References: <52388D58-830F-4986-8073-0BB20465CE27@att.net> Message-ID: http://blogs.redding.com/bross/archives/2011/06/herger-opposes-1.html Bruce Ross Editorial Page Editor Record Searchlight (530) 225-8238 Herger opposes water bill Wednesday, June 15, 2011 For those who've been keeping score at home, Rep. Wally Herger today came out against HR 1837, the San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act. Critics said it could have also been called the North State Water Unreliability Act, and they apparently got the congressman's attention. Herger Statement on H.R. 1837 "After carefully reviewing H.R. 1837 and discussing it with water users in our area, I have strong concerns that the bill, as currently drafted, would negatively impact Northern California water rights and preempt state water law. As I have long stated, California's area of origin protections are clear and unambiguous - our water needs must be met first, before excess water is allowed to flow south. "I agree with Congressman Nunes' desire to address the ESA-driven water shortages that have needlessly devastated family farmers and the economy of rural California. However, my primary responsibility in Congress is to the North State, and any legislation designed to address these problems must fully protect and respect Northern California's superior water rights. "Congressman Nunes has committed to work with us to address these legitimate concerns. In addition, the Chairman of the Water and Power Subcommittee, Congressman McClintock, who shares my concerns as well, has committed that he will not move any bill that in any way weakens local area of origin water rights or undermines senior water rights holders." Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jun 16 07:43:10 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 07:43:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Judge denies request to step up delta pumping Message-ID: <8ECE97FB-3B31-451B-B58B-664C490A5AF9@att.net> Judge denies request to step up delta pumping http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/06/15/2429009/judge-denies-request-to-step-up.html Posted at 09:39 PM on Wednesday, Jun. 15, 2011 By John Ellis / And Mark Grossi / The Fresno Bee A judge on Wednesday refused to order water pumps back to full blast at the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, denying a restraining order sought by farm-water officials. U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger in Fresno said Interior Department officials had the right to curtail pumping for 14 days to protect migrating fall-run chinook salmon. West-side farm water officials, who filed for a temporary restraining order last week, said fall-run salmon are not protected under the Endangered Species Act. The cutback was illegal, water officials said. Tom Birmingham, general manager and counsel for Westlands Water District, said the federal Bureau of Reclamation is obligated to pump as much as it can when there is excess water. But the federal government's attorney, Charles Shockey, said farmers are getting 80% of their contracted allotment this year and could get more. "Nothing about the pumping restrictions will change that," he said. He added that the Secretary of the Interior has authority to provide benefits to fish in the delta. Wanger agreed with the government. When the government runs pumps in the delta, fish are being killed, Wanger said. The Central Valley Project Improvement Act says the Bureau of Reclamation must protect all fish, not just endangered species, he concluded. The pumps are at the center of controversy between environmentalists and water users. Environmentalists say the water pumps are the main culprit in the decline of many protected delta fish, such as the delta smelt, winter-run salmon and steelhead. At the same time, the pumps provide irrigation water to farmers in Westlands Water District and other west-siders on the Central Valley Project. Farmers hope to get more than the 80% of their contracted allotments if the pumps keep going at capacity. About 2,400 acre-feet of pumping production is being lost daily during the cutback, farm-water officials said. One acre-foot is 326,000 gallons, or a 12- to 18-month supply for an average Valley family. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Mon Jun 20 12:06:59 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:06:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Status of DFG work on suction dredge EIR and Regulations, June 20, 2011 Message-ID: <4DFF9A53.6000204@tcrcd.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Status of DFG work on suction dredge EIR and Regulations, June 20, 2011 Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:00:06 -0700 From: Mark Stopher Reply-To: mstopher at dfg.ca.gov To: Mark Stopher Interested Parties I am receiving quite a few requests for information, so I offer the following update. The public comment period closed on May 10 and DFG commenced the review of all comments. Over 9,000 email form letters were received opposing any and all suction dredge mining. Several hundred form letters were received through regular mail supporting suction dredging. Many additional letters with substantive and detailed comments were also received. There is a lot of information to sift through, organize and consider in preparing the Final EIR and Final regulations. We have been and continue to work on those tasks. We said before we expected to complete the regulatory process in November of this year. We are capable of meeting that goal, unless we are directed otherwise by the legislature and the Governor. Many of you know that the legislature has been considering language which would extend the current moratorium another five years, with certain provisions for ending the moratorium earlier and also restrict the use of State funds to continue the regulatory process. Budget Trailer Bill AB 120, (amended June 8, 2011), and approved by the Assembly (on June 15) and Senate (on June 10) includes the following language on page 6: "(12) Existing law designates the issuance by the Department of Fish and Game of permits to operate vacuum or suction dredge equipment to be a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and suspends the issuance of permits, and mining pursuant to a permit, until the department has completed an environmental impact report for the project as ordered by the court in a specified court action. Existing law prohibits the use of any vacuum or suction dredge equipment in any river, stream, or lake, for instream mining purposes, until the Director of Fish and Game certifies to the Secretary of State that (a) the department has completed the environmental review of its existing vacuum or suction dredge equipment regulations as ordered by the court, (b) the department has transmitted for filing with the Secretary of State a certified copy of new regulations, as necessary, and (c) the new regulations are operative. This bill would modify that moratorium to prohibit the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment until June 30, 2016, or until the director?s certification to the secretary as described above, whichever is earlier. The bill would additionally require the director to certify that the new regulations fully mitigate all identified significant environmental impacts and that a fee structure is in place that will fully cover all costs to the department related to the administration of the program." I am not aware of any action taken yet by Governor Brown on this bill. The Senate (SB 98) and Assembly (AB 98) budget bills, which passed both houses on June 15, included the following language: "The funds appropriated in this item shall not be used by the Department of Fish and Game for suction 3. dredge mining regulation, permitting, or other activities, except litigation and enforcement costs." Governor Brown vetoed this bill. It remains unclear when the State budget will be signed by the Governor and take effect. If the above budget language and trailer bill language is ultimately included in the approved budget, DFG's current interpretation is that we must terminate further work on developing a Final EIR and regulations. In the meanwhile we are continuing work on both the Final EIR and regulations. I have been asked by several members of the public if we can expedite our work so the regulations take effect sooner rather than later, so that we could be finished before being directed to stop work. In my opinion, that approach is neither feasible or productive. There is simply too much substantive public comment to consider, respond to, and integrate into the Final EIR and regulations. This work takes time and it provides no enduring value if it is not done well. Mark Stopher Environmental Program Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 voice 530.225.2275 fax 530.225.2391 cell 530.945.1344 mstopher at dfg.ca.gov -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CA Suction Dredge EIR" group. To post to this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ca-suction-dredge-eir?hl=en. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Mon Jun 20 12:06:59 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:06:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Status of DFG work on suction dredge EIR and Regulations, June 20, 2011 Message-ID: <4DFF9A53.6000204@tcrcd.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Status of DFG work on suction dredge EIR and Regulations, June 20, 2011 Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:00:06 -0700 From: Mark Stopher Reply-To: mstopher at dfg.ca.gov To: Mark Stopher Interested Parties I am receiving quite a few requests for information, so I offer the following update. The public comment period closed on May 10 and DFG commenced the review of all comments. Over 9,000 email form letters were received opposing any and all suction dredge mining. Several hundred form letters were received through regular mail supporting suction dredging. Many additional letters with substantive and detailed comments were also received. There is a lot of information to sift through, organize and consider in preparing the Final EIR and Final regulations. We have been and continue to work on those tasks. We said before we expected to complete the regulatory process in November of this year. We are capable of meeting that goal, unless we are directed otherwise by the legislature and the Governor. Many of you know that the legislature has been considering language which would extend the current moratorium another five years, with certain provisions for ending the moratorium earlier and also restrict the use of State funds to continue the regulatory process. Budget Trailer Bill AB 120, (amended June 8, 2011), and approved by the Assembly (on June 15) and Senate (on June 10) includes the following language on page 6: "(12) Existing law designates the issuance by the Department of Fish and Game of permits to operate vacuum or suction dredge equipment to be a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and suspends the issuance of permits, and mining pursuant to a permit, until the department has completed an environmental impact report for the project as ordered by the court in a specified court action. Existing law prohibits the use of any vacuum or suction dredge equipment in any river, stream, or lake, for instream mining purposes, until the Director of Fish and Game certifies to the Secretary of State that (a) the department has completed the environmental review of its existing vacuum or suction dredge equipment regulations as ordered by the court, (b) the department has transmitted for filing with the Secretary of State a certified copy of new regulations, as necessary, and (c) the new regulations are operative. This bill would modify that moratorium to prohibit the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment until June 30, 2016, or until the director?s certification to the secretary as described above, whichever is earlier. The bill would additionally require the director to certify that the new regulations fully mitigate all identified significant environmental impacts and that a fee structure is in place that will fully cover all costs to the department related to the administration of the program." I am not aware of any action taken yet by Governor Brown on this bill. The Senate (SB 98) and Assembly (AB 98) budget bills, which passed both houses on June 15, included the following language: "The funds appropriated in this item shall not be used by the Department of Fish and Game for suction 3. dredge mining regulation, permitting, or other activities, except litigation and enforcement costs." Governor Brown vetoed this bill. It remains unclear when the State budget will be signed by the Governor and take effect. If the above budget language and trailer bill language is ultimately included in the approved budget, DFG's current interpretation is that we must terminate further work on developing a Final EIR and regulations. In the meanwhile we are continuing work on both the Final EIR and regulations. I have been asked by several members of the public if we can expedite our work so the regulations take effect sooner rather than later, so that we could be finished before being directed to stop work. In my opinion, that approach is neither feasible or productive. There is simply too much substantive public comment to consider, respond to, and integrate into the Final EIR and regulations. This work takes time and it provides no enduring value if it is not done well. Mark Stopher Environmental Program Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 voice 530.225.2275 fax 530.225.2391 cell 530.945.1344 mstopher at dfg.ca.gov -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CA Suction Dredge EIR" group. To post to this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ca-suction-dredge-eir?hl=en. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Mon Jun 20 12:56:33 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:56:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee 6-19-2011: Troubled Waters of Battle Creek Message-ID: <4DFFA5F1.5070304@tcrcd.net> Troubled waters of Battle Creek mweiser at sacbee.com Published Sunday, Jun. 19, 2011 MANTON -- Here at Battle Creek, an icy stream that tumbles off Mount Lassen, state and federal agencies are spending $128 million to bring endangered salmon back to 48 miles of water blocked by dams for nearly a century. At the same time, another arm of state government is allowing clear-cut logging on thousands of acres just upstream, which some scientists say could jeopardize the costly restoration project. The Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project is considered the largest of its kind in the nation. It involves removing five dams owned by Pacific Gas and Electric Co., and modifying four others so steelhead and winter- and spring-run salmon can pass. Battle Creek may be the last shot at survival for the species, all of which are endangered. Scientists say the logging, if not managed carefully, could handicap the expensive restoration. The danger: Erosion from clear-cut forest tracts could smother spawning habitat before salmon have a chance to use it. The apparent conflict in government missions, critics say, points to flaws in the state's management of logging on private land. "There should be enforcement to protect (Battle Creek) water quality," said Pat Higgins, a fisheries biologist who has consulted on the restoration. "Instead, they're allowing unlimited (tree) cutting, and it's still going on." The trees are cut by Sierra Pacific Industries, a privately held company based in nearby Anderson and the state's largest property owner. The company is in the early stages of a strategy to boost lumber production. It includes logging in other watersheds important to salmon, such as the American River, where federal officials face a 2020 deadline to restore salmon above Folsom Dam. The logging at Battle Creek complies with state law and is overseen by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, also known as Cal Fire. Sierra Pacific says its operations are tightly regulated. "There is a whole lot of inherent protection in the rules," said Ed Murphy, the company's manager of resource information systems. Sierra Pacific uses a technique called "even-age management," the California regulatory term for clear-cutting. The goal is to convert a large percentage of its acreage, essentially, to pine plantations. Sierra Pacific has submitted 16 logging plans over the past 12 years for almost 20,000 acres in the Battle Creek watershed. In a typical even-age logging plan, all vegetation is removed from multiple 20-acre parcels, leaving a checkerboard pattern of bare ground that may span 1,000 acres or more. One or two oaks and standing dead trees are usually left as "habitat diversity." Then each parcel is replanted with pine seedlings. Herbicides are sprayed to eliminate competing vegetation before planting. Marily Woodhouse has lived in Manton for 22 years. She is co-founder of the Battle Creek Alliance, which has filed suit against several Sierra Pacific logging plans. "We're not telling them not to log their land," she said. "We're saying, don't clear-cut and don't use a ton of herbicides." Cloudy scrutiny Clear-cutting, as opposed to selective logging, leaves little vegetation behind to trap erosion. And the state does not require logging companies to monitor water quality. The primary agency charged with making sure logging doesn't ruin fish habitat is the state Department of Fish and Game, which works in concert with Cal Fire. But Fish and Game has been strained by budget cuts. Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last year cut $1.5 million from Fish and Game's logging review program. A similar cut remains in Gov. Jerry Brown's proposed budget for the new fiscal year. Eight jobs were cut from the Fish and Game staff that monitored logging in the north state, said Curt Babcock, the department's regional habitat conservation program manager. Now, only half the logging projects in the area get a field inspection before approval. Fish and Game still scrutinizes logging roads, often the source of most erosion. But it gives little attention to wildlife and aquatic habitat threats, Babcock said, and it doesn't monitor logging rules for protecting streams. "Overall, I'd say there is definitely a potential for the timber harvests there to affect salmon," Babcock said of Battle Creek. "We're spread pretty thin." With the state role reduced, Woodhouse's group decided to conduct its own water monitoring tests. It began taking samples 18 months ago. Each week, Woodhouse loads testing gear into her Chevy S-10 pickup and ventures on unpaved county roads to assess the forks and tributaries of Battle Creek. The results, she said, show an increase in the water's cloudiness, suggesting erosion has increased. "You used to be able to look at the water and it was clear," she said. "Now it's a gray or green color, or it has a soapy appearance." Erosion is a threat to spawning habitat everywhere, but it is an especially urgent concern at Battle Creek, given the expensive effort to bring back salmon and steelhead. "It's unlikely we can recover those species in the Central Valley if we don't get viable populations in Battle Creek," said Brian Ellrott, regional salmon and steelhead recovery coordinator at the National Marine Fisheries Service. "It is critically important." Cold conclusions After a decade of study and buy-in from PG&E, the restoration began in 2009 and is expected to be finished in 2015. It is overseen by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which was required by the 1992 Central Valley Project Improvement Act to double naturally spawning salmon populations in the region. The cost, estimated at $43 million in 2004, has swelled to $128 million. That includes $47 million in federal funds, including $9 million from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, and $58 million from various state sources. The money mostly pays contractors to remove five dams and build new fish ladders on four others. PG&E is giving up $20 million in hydropower to provide more flow for salmon. "We're opening up streams that have not been accessible to salmon for 90 years," said Paul Moreno, a spokesman for PG&E. Battle Creek is special because its waters start atop 10,000-foot Mount Lassen, then trickle through underground passages. The meltwater emerges in seeps and springs, keeping the creek cold. Salmon require cold water to survive and breed. This is especially true of the endangered spring-run chinook, which has the unique habit of migrating upstream from the ocean in spring, then waiting until fall to spawn. But erosion has already compromised the creek's suitability for spawning, according to a 2004 watershed assessment. It called the spawning habitat "moderately favorable" overall, the equivalent of a "C" grade. Nearly half the 50 individual stream sites surveyed had too much sediment to be good spawning habitat, earning "D" grades; and 60 percent of pools in the creek got "F" grades because they are too shallow to support spring-run salmon through the summer. The report suggested 1997 storms likely caused erosion that led to those poor grades. But it did not rule out other problems, including those linked to logging. The research by Terraqua Inc. was commissioned by the Battle Creek Watershed Conservancy, using federal funds. The conservancy is a local nonprofit that works closely with government agencies on the restoration project. Another study for the project by Kier Associates blamed the erosion largely on logging. "There was definitely a profound change in habitat in Battle Creek, and it's consistent with extensive upland disturbance," said Higgins, who prepared the report. The Kier report, however, was excluded from the final study. When the firm published the analysis itself in 2009, it said the work was excluded "at the request of a major private timberland owner" on the conservancy board. That timberland owner is Sierra Pacific Industries. Complex science Sierra Pacific's Murphy denied his company suppressed the report. He said the whole conservancy board decided to exclude it, noting Higgins' methods were more appropriate to coastal forests. It is a complicated science, one that Cal Fire has been repeatedly criticized for handling poorly. The State Board of Forestry, a politically appointed panel, sets the rules that Cal Fire enforces to regulate logging on private land. Studies as far back as 1994 have urged the board to overhaul its rules on cumulative analysis, yet it has not done so. A University of California panel in 2001 said cumulative analysis is so vital that it should be stripped from Cal Fire and given to a new agency with special training. The panel called many of the state's erosion-related logging rules "demonstrably inadequate." "The State has apparently never explicitly acknowledged the need to protect the runoff regulating functions of forests," the panel wrote. The Board of Forestry's executive officer, George Gentry, said the board will likely begin reviewing the cumulative effects rules in 2012. "People can say, 'Well, you need to do it better'," Gentry said. "We should do it better. But show me how. There's no easy answer to that. It's a very complex science." ? Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved. Share ------------------------------------------------------------------------ /Call The Bee's Matt Weiser, (916) 321-1264. Follow him on Twitter @matt_weiser./ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Mon Jun 20 12:56:33 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:56:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee 6-19-2011: Troubled Waters of Battle Creek Message-ID: <4DFFA5F1.5070304@tcrcd.net> Troubled waters of Battle Creek mweiser at sacbee.com Published Sunday, Jun. 19, 2011 MANTON -- Here at Battle Creek, an icy stream that tumbles off Mount Lassen, state and federal agencies are spending $128 million to bring endangered salmon back to 48 miles of water blocked by dams for nearly a century. At the same time, another arm of state government is allowing clear-cut logging on thousands of acres just upstream, which some scientists say could jeopardize the costly restoration project. The Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project is considered the largest of its kind in the nation. It involves removing five dams owned by Pacific Gas and Electric Co., and modifying four others so steelhead and winter- and spring-run salmon can pass. Battle Creek may be the last shot at survival for the species, all of which are endangered. Scientists say the logging, if not managed carefully, could handicap the expensive restoration. The danger: Erosion from clear-cut forest tracts could smother spawning habitat before salmon have a chance to use it. The apparent conflict in government missions, critics say, points to flaws in the state's management of logging on private land. "There should be enforcement to protect (Battle Creek) water quality," said Pat Higgins, a fisheries biologist who has consulted on the restoration. "Instead, they're allowing unlimited (tree) cutting, and it's still going on." The trees are cut by Sierra Pacific Industries, a privately held company based in nearby Anderson and the state's largest property owner. The company is in the early stages of a strategy to boost lumber production. It includes logging in other watersheds important to salmon, such as the American River, where federal officials face a 2020 deadline to restore salmon above Folsom Dam. The logging at Battle Creek complies with state law and is overseen by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, also known as Cal Fire. Sierra Pacific says its operations are tightly regulated. "There is a whole lot of inherent protection in the rules," said Ed Murphy, the company's manager of resource information systems. Sierra Pacific uses a technique called "even-age management," the California regulatory term for clear-cutting. The goal is to convert a large percentage of its acreage, essentially, to pine plantations. Sierra Pacific has submitted 16 logging plans over the past 12 years for almost 20,000 acres in the Battle Creek watershed. In a typical even-age logging plan, all vegetation is removed from multiple 20-acre parcels, leaving a checkerboard pattern of bare ground that may span 1,000 acres or more. One or two oaks and standing dead trees are usually left as "habitat diversity." Then each parcel is replanted with pine seedlings. Herbicides are sprayed to eliminate competing vegetation before planting. Marily Woodhouse has lived in Manton for 22 years. She is co-founder of the Battle Creek Alliance, which has filed suit against several Sierra Pacific logging plans. "We're not telling them not to log their land," she said. "We're saying, don't clear-cut and don't use a ton of herbicides." Cloudy scrutiny Clear-cutting, as opposed to selective logging, leaves little vegetation behind to trap erosion. And the state does not require logging companies to monitor water quality. The primary agency charged with making sure logging doesn't ruin fish habitat is the state Department of Fish and Game, which works in concert with Cal Fire. But Fish and Game has been strained by budget cuts. Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last year cut $1.5 million from Fish and Game's logging review program. A similar cut remains in Gov. Jerry Brown's proposed budget for the new fiscal year. Eight jobs were cut from the Fish and Game staff that monitored logging in the north state, said Curt Babcock, the department's regional habitat conservation program manager. Now, only half the logging projects in the area get a field inspection before approval. Fish and Game still scrutinizes logging roads, often the source of most erosion. But it gives little attention to wildlife and aquatic habitat threats, Babcock said, and it doesn't monitor logging rules for protecting streams. "Overall, I'd say there is definitely a potential for the timber harvests there to affect salmon," Babcock said of Battle Creek. "We're spread pretty thin." With the state role reduced, Woodhouse's group decided to conduct its own water monitoring tests. It began taking samples 18 months ago. Each week, Woodhouse loads testing gear into her Chevy S-10 pickup and ventures on unpaved county roads to assess the forks and tributaries of Battle Creek. The results, she said, show an increase in the water's cloudiness, suggesting erosion has increased. "You used to be able to look at the water and it was clear," she said. "Now it's a gray or green color, or it has a soapy appearance." Erosion is a threat to spawning habitat everywhere, but it is an especially urgent concern at Battle Creek, given the expensive effort to bring back salmon and steelhead. "It's unlikely we can recover those species in the Central Valley if we don't get viable populations in Battle Creek," said Brian Ellrott, regional salmon and steelhead recovery coordinator at the National Marine Fisheries Service. "It is critically important." Cold conclusions After a decade of study and buy-in from PG&E, the restoration began in 2009 and is expected to be finished in 2015. It is overseen by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which was required by the 1992 Central Valley Project Improvement Act to double naturally spawning salmon populations in the region. The cost, estimated at $43 million in 2004, has swelled to $128 million. That includes $47 million in federal funds, including $9 million from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, and $58 million from various state sources. The money mostly pays contractors to remove five dams and build new fish ladders on four others. PG&E is giving up $20 million in hydropower to provide more flow for salmon. "We're opening up streams that have not been accessible to salmon for 90 years," said Paul Moreno, a spokesman for PG&E. Battle Creek is special because its waters start atop 10,000-foot Mount Lassen, then trickle through underground passages. The meltwater emerges in seeps and springs, keeping the creek cold. Salmon require cold water to survive and breed. This is especially true of the endangered spring-run chinook, which has the unique habit of migrating upstream from the ocean in spring, then waiting until fall to spawn. But erosion has already compromised the creek's suitability for spawning, according to a 2004 watershed assessment. It called the spawning habitat "moderately favorable" overall, the equivalent of a "C" grade. Nearly half the 50 individual stream sites surveyed had too much sediment to be good spawning habitat, earning "D" grades; and 60 percent of pools in the creek got "F" grades because they are too shallow to support spring-run salmon through the summer. The report suggested 1997 storms likely caused erosion that led to those poor grades. But it did not rule out other problems, including those linked to logging. The research by Terraqua Inc. was commissioned by the Battle Creek Watershed Conservancy, using federal funds. The conservancy is a local nonprofit that works closely with government agencies on the restoration project. Another study for the project by Kier Associates blamed the erosion largely on logging. "There was definitely a profound change in habitat in Battle Creek, and it's consistent with extensive upland disturbance," said Higgins, who prepared the report. The Kier report, however, was excluded from the final study. When the firm published the analysis itself in 2009, it said the work was excluded "at the request of a major private timberland owner" on the conservancy board. That timberland owner is Sierra Pacific Industries. Complex science Sierra Pacific's Murphy denied his company suppressed the report. He said the whole conservancy board decided to exclude it, noting Higgins' methods were more appropriate to coastal forests. It is a complicated science, one that Cal Fire has been repeatedly criticized for handling poorly. The State Board of Forestry, a politically appointed panel, sets the rules that Cal Fire enforces to regulate logging on private land. Studies as far back as 1994 have urged the board to overhaul its rules on cumulative analysis, yet it has not done so. A University of California panel in 2001 said cumulative analysis is so vital that it should be stripped from Cal Fire and given to a new agency with special training. The panel called many of the state's erosion-related logging rules "demonstrably inadequate." "The State has apparently never explicitly acknowledged the need to protect the runoff regulating functions of forests," the panel wrote. The Board of Forestry's executive officer, George Gentry, said the board will likely begin reviewing the cumulative effects rules in 2012. "People can say, 'Well, you need to do it better'," Gentry said. "We should do it better. But show me how. There's no easy answer to that. It's a very complex science." ? Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved. Share ------------------------------------------------------------------------ /Call The Bee's Matt Weiser, (916) 321-1264. Follow him on Twitter @matt_weiser./ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 22 08:12:50 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 08:12:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle Editorial- Wading into the Water War Message-ID: <7B2DE1AF-0BA4-425D-A18A-5CA8899EB1C3@att.net> Archive | Feedback | Facebook | Wading into the water war http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/06/19/EDH01JTNGS.DTL Sunday, June 19, 2011 Print E-mail Share Comments (6) Font | Size: 0 Brendan Hoffman / Getty Images Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Alpaugh IMAGES View Larger Images MORE OPINION FOLLOWING UP On Federal Abortion Rules / Boxer offers support for women in... 06.20.11 Time to begin a measured Afghanistan withdrawal 06.20.11 Letters to the editor, June 2006.20.11 The serene landscape of California's delta belies the brutal battles over its most precious export - water. In the early days, leaders simply saw the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers' confluence as a giant plumbing system. Today, we know it is the center of the web of life that sustains California. Proposed federal legislation takes direct aim at that ecosystem and the life it supports, upending a century of work to balance the water needs of California farms, cities, fish and landscapes that reflect the vagaries of our Mediterranean climate. If it becomes law, it will benefit a small fraction of California farmers in the Westlands and Kern water districts, but cost all other Californians - and the land itself. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Alpaugh (Tulare County), authored HR1837 "to take a global look at California's water problems," said his spokesman, Andrew House. To Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, who has worked on water for decades, Nunes' bill is "an IED." At the very least, it is an attempt to return water rules to the early 20th century, when those who got the water first, got it all. It does not reflect that now there are 25 million more Californians and that our water supplies are seriously oversubscribed. Observers say Nunes has the votes to push the bill through the House. Senate passage is dicey, though. As proposed, the law would: -- Give water contractors an entitlement that supersedes that of any other call on state water, including flows to restore fisheries and maintain water quality. Nunes points out that the delta is in worse shape since the decision to dedicate water to the environment. "We've come to the conclusion that a 20-year experiment, which is making no progress, is one that should be changed," said his aide, House. -- Strip water rights from their owners, who are mostly in Northern California. "This says 'the federal government is going to take your water, and you don't have a say,' " said Miller. -- Eliminate protections for wild fish by precluding distinctions between farmed and wild salmon. -- Exempt the two major water projects from federal and state endangered species protections. -- Require the federal government to construct new facilities to make up for any water delivery reductions for Central Valley Project contractors. -- Convert 25-year federal water contracts to permanent entitlements. -- Repeal tiered pricing put in place to encourage efficient water use and conservation. Instead of asking Californians to share the responsibilities and benefits of our limited water, this bill would concentrate the most precious commodity on the planet in the hands of a privileged few. California water - a chronology California water politics is convoluted, controversial and arguably the state's most significant issue. About 75 percent of the water supply comes from north of Sacramento while 80 percent of the demand comes from the southern part of the state. Urban users consume about 10 percent of the supply. The Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta serves as plumbing for two of the six major water projects. Those two projects serve 22 million people and 3.6 million acres of agricultural land. 1940 California population 6.9 million 1937 Federal government authorizes the Central Valley Project to address flooding and irrigate farmland. 1960 State Water Project begun. Combined delta exports from the CVP and SWP are less than 3 million acre feet a year. 1982 Reclamation Act reform limited amount of federally subsidized water. Irrigators had to pay the full water cost for any excess. 1992 Central Valley Project Improvement Act dedicates 800,000 acre-feet of annual runoff to the environment, limits water contracts to 25 years, instead of previous 40-year terms. 1994 Federal and state governments begin developing a plan to meet federal Environmental Species and Clean Water acts. Delta exports are now more than 6 million acre feet a year. 2000 California and federal governments approve CalFed Bay-Delta plan to reduce water conflicts, a 30-year program with an $8.7 billion cost. 2006 CalFed morphs into Bay Delta Conservation Plan. 2007 Federal court orders less water pumped from the delta to protect fish during drought. 2008-09 Federal agencies restrict water exports to protect the Delta smelt and Chinook salmon. 2009 Legislature passes a package of bills to address delta and state water planning. 2010 U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger rules that newest federal pumping restrictions need to be rewritten. 2010 California population 37.3 million This article appeared on page F - 10 of the San Francisco Chronicle Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/06/17/EDH01JTNGS.DTL#ixzz1Q1B7pTjZ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: divider_editorials.png Type: image/png Size: 1762 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: rss_icon.gif Type: image/gif Size: 570 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 116 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mail.gif Type: image/gif Size: 115 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: share.gif Type: image/gif Size: 96 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: comments.gif Type: image/gif Size: 114 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clear.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: down.gif Type: image/gif Size: 92 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: minus.gif Type: image/gif Size: 142 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: plus.gif Type: image/gif Size: 145 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: facebook.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1131 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: articlebox_img_bg.gif Type: image/gif Size: 76 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: plus-green.gif Type: image/gif Size: 54 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 22 19:17:07 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:17:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Doug Obegi's Blog- Bipartisan Opposition to H.R. 1837 Continues to Grow Message-ID: <2B6424A6-5698-48FA-A049-BCB816FE62A1@att.net> Doug Obegi of the Natural Resources Defense Council has a great blog on the Bipartisan Opposition to the San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act (HR 1837). You can check it out at: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dobegi/widespread_opposition_to_hr_18.html It has all the various editorials, letters, position papers, etc. there and it is updated as new information becomes available. I just found a great editorial by the Redding Record Searchlight there that I had missed. I will post it on this list. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 22 19:19:39 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:19:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding Record Searchlight Editorial: On water bill, Herger stands with enviros Message-ID: <75D8C98A-2A71-4F7D-9684-D4EE51F8C354@att.net> Editorial: On water bill, Herger stands with enviros http://www.redding.com/news/2011/jun/18/editorial-on-water-bill-herger-stands-with/ It's a political event rarer than a green-sturgeon sighting: Rep. Wally Herger this week lined up with his usual nemeses at the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups and against a farm-friendly water bill promoted by some of his fellow House Republicans from California. That bill ? the San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act, sponsored by Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Tulare ? had already drawn widespread opposition from environmentalists and fishing groups. The measure would boost water supplies to San Joaquin Valley farms primarily at the expense of set-asides for California's ailing fisheries, which motivated the environmental outcry. In the process, though, it would also put the north state's senior water rights at risk and generally topple California's tenuously balanced water-priority system. Both of California's Democratic senators ? including Dianne Feinstein, no foe of agriculture ? also opposed it. Herger? Until Wednesday, he'd taken no official stand. Loyalty to GOP colleagues and Herger's philosophy that resources should be put to productive use would argue in favor, but his own district's direct interests pulled in the other direction. In the end, the hometown voters won. Herger announced that even as he shared Nunes' goal of getting more water to farms, Nunes' bill "would negatively impact Northern California water rights and preempt state water law. As I have long stated, California's area of origin protections are clear and unambiguous ? our water needs must be met first, before excess water is allowed to flow south." He added that any bill to address Central and Southern California's problems "must fully protect and respect Northern California's superior water rights." Amen. In a divided Congress, Nunes' bill is likely to go nowhere, but the larger lesson is that when it comes to water, north state residents share tremendous common interests that transcend our neighborhood squabbles. Farmers who need orchard irrigation, fishing guides who rely on thriving salmon and steelhead, and city dwellers who just want to keep their lawns green ? all would lose if misguided laws bumped the Sacramento Valley from its place at the front of the line. ? 2011 Record Searchlight. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Basic.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Thu Jun 23 18:00:21 2011 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 19:00:21 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Wheel Gulch to start surveying next week. Equipment moves in the week of July 4th Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A6F9D510F@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Trinity River Enthusiasts - This year's Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) mechanical channel rehabilitation projects is going to start soon at the Wheel Gulch site (about 3 miles downstream of Junction City). Initial work will include surveying and construction staking of the project boundaries. Heavy equipment is slated to move in the week of July 4th with clearing and grubbing to start shortly thereafter. We will only work in the river during the July 15-Sept 15 in-river work period. While in-river construction will be completed by Sept 15, floodplain and upslope work will continue until construction is done in approximately December 2011. The site is primarily on private lands and is closed to public access. I attach a copy of an ad that will be placed in next week's Trinity Journal. Best Regards- Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net TRINITY JOURNAL AD [cid:image003.png at 01CC31CF.6ACE5480] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 219043 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jun 23 19:19:45 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 19:19:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Chico News and Review Editorial- Herger Gets it Right Message-ID: <54CF973F-2080-4F23-99FF-5FD738687E4F@att.net> Herger gets it right But then blows it with phony anti-ESA slam http://www.newsreview.com/chico/herger-gets-it-right/content?oid=2412796 Read 1 reader submitted comment This article was published on 06.23.11. Last week, in his guest comment on this page, Aqualliance water-policy analyst Jim Brobeck wrote about the San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act (HR 1837). That?s a bill by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare) and two other San Joaquin Valley Republican congressmen that would clear the way to ship more Northern California water south by, among other things, abolishing policies meant to protect Northern Californians? senior water rights. Brobeck called on local Reps. Wally Herger and Tom McClintock to ?join with Northern California politicians of all stripes to oppose this water heist.? We?re happy to report that Herger and McClintock have said they will oppose HR 1837. As Herger put it in a press release, ?California?s area of origin protections are clear and unambiguous?our water needs must be met first, before excess water is allowed to flow south.? But Herger also made a point of stating that he agreed ?with Congressman Nunes? desire to address the [Endangered Species Act]-driven water shortages that have needlessly devastated family farmers and the economy of rural California.? That?s when his otherwise reasonable policy statement veered right off the cliff. The ESA wasn?t responsible for the water shortages in 2008 through 2010; a prolonged drought was the culprit. Even so, San Joaquin Valley farm sales stayed high throughout the dry spell. The economy of rural California was not devastated. And this year, a wet one, farmers are getting plenty of water?despite the fact that the ESA is still solidly in place. We applaud Rep. Herger for protecting Sacramento Valley water rights. That?s what we elected him to do. If he wants to reform or abolish the ESA, however, he should do so conscientiously, by offering a thoughtful critique of the act. Otherwise he?s just taking cheap shots and parroting the party line. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Fri Jun 24 06:41:31 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:41:31 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Chico News and Review Editorial- Herger Gets it Right In-Reply-To: <54CF973F-2080-4F23-99FF-5FD738687E4F@att.net> References: <54CF973F-2080-4F23-99FF-5FD738687E4F@att.net> Message-ID: <20110624134141.URZZ26484.omta02.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jun 24 11:40:13 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 11:40:13 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Environmental Groups Respond to Pacific Legal Foundation on Delta Smelt Lawsuit References: Message-ID: <3A5AB78C-7AC7-42A2-AAE4-9ACADFEBC120@att.net> The Pacific Legal Foundation's press release is located at http://www.pacificlegal.org/page.aspx?pid=1612 PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release June 24, 2011 Contact: Carolee Krieger, C-WIN 805-969-0824 Bill Jennings, CSPA 209-464-5067 Barbara Vlamis, AquAlliance 530-519-7468 Environmental Groups Respond to Pacific Legal Foundation on Delta Smelt Lawsuit Fresno ? Environmental groups are publicly questioning the basis of Pacific Legal Foundation's lawsuit challenging the legal basis of Endangered Species Act protections for the Delta Smelt. The lawsuit is one of many recent lawsuits based on Westland Water District?s claims of huge reductions in irrigated acreage on the West side of the San Joaquin Valley as a result of Endangered Species Act restrictions on Delta pumping. New research has raised serious questions about the veracity of Westlands' claims. California Water Research Associates recently issued a report showing that 100,000 acres of land, which Westlands claimed was fallowed as a result of Delta pumping restrictions, was actually retired because of toxic salt and boron contamination of soils adversely affecting agricultural production.[1] ?Westlands Water District has been making extremely misleading claims for years about the causes of fallowed land in the district,? said Carolee Krieger, Executive Director of the California Water Impact Network. ?The fact is, the soils in the district have become waterlogged and contaminated with salt and boron. As a result, the use of the land for agriculture is severely impaired and it continues to get worse.? The west side of the San Joaquin Valley is former alkali desert that has been reclaimed only by dumping tons of gypsum on the ground to bind naturally occurring salts, and leaching the soil with subsidized imported Delta water. In Westlands Water District, the leaching and irrigation of water-intensive crops such as cotton and almonds has generated extensive subsurface build up of saline water that has accumulated in the eastern part of the district, impairing over 200,000 acres so far and immediately threatens another 100,000 acres, according to the Bureau of Reclamation. For the last decade, Westlands has been buying land from owners who are ready to give up trying to farm the waterlogged, saline soils. The district is reallocating the water to less impaired land within the district, and in the last year, has been transferring the surplus to Metropolitan Water District. Much of the land and groundwater within Westlands also contains high concentrations of selenium, a trace mineral that can be extremely toxic to wildlife and to humans. One of the hot spots of selenium toxicity is just south of Mendota. The US government purchased 37,000 acres and attached covenants forbidding irrigation of the land with ground or surface water, before giving the lands to Westlands Water District to manage. As a result, Westlands Water District now owns about 100,000 acres of salty poisoned land, which has been retired from irrigated production. The largest extent of impaired land is south of Mendota. ?The simple fact is that restrictions on pumping Delta water have nothing to do with the fallowing of Westlands' 100,000 acres of retired land,? said Bill Jennings of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. ?Blaming the farmers? problems on the Delta smelt and the Endangered Species Act is a red herring masking the Pacific Legal Foundation?s philosophical objections to the concept of protecting endangered species. Delta smelt is simply the canary in the coal mine representing the collapse of the biological tapestry in the Bay-Delta estuary. The land is fallowed because of the legacy of greed and over-irrigation of marginal lands.? Decades of over-irrigation of toxic, saline soils in the district has also contaminated much of the shallow and deep groundwater in the district. There are large areas that have no groundwater fit for drinking or irrigation. Kettleman City, at the southern end of Westlands, is trying to find money for a water treatment system to remove arsenic in the city?s wells, another legacy of over-irrigation of west side soils. Westlands has implied that more water would bring the land around Mendota back into production, but over a million acre feet of water in 2011 has not helped. Unemployment has actually increased since 2009. ?Westlands needs to admit that the retired land has been poisoned, not taken out of production because of Endangered Species Act restrictions on Delta pumping.? said Krieger. Barbara Vlamis of AquAlliance in Chico said ?They have created a huge toxic, salty mess on the west side, and that's a big reason why the land is fallowed and West side towns are suffering. They don?t need more water from the Sacramento Valley, they need less water. Sean Hannity was hoodwinked.? Westlands' reported fallowed acreage: 2009: 156,000 acres retired land (est.): 64% 2010: 123,000 acres retired land (est.): 81% 2011: 125,000 acres (est.) retired land (est.): 80% Source: Westlands 2009 & 2010 crop reports, 2011 Annual Water Use and Supply Unemployment in west side towns: Mendota April 2011: 42.7% April 2009 38.2% Firebaugh: April 2011: 28.8% April 2009: 25.1% Huron: April 2011: 35.7% April 2009: 31.5% Tranquility: April 2011 19.5% April 2009: 16.8% Source: California Employment Development Department ### [1] See http://www.scribd.com/doc/56909617/Mendota-Evidence-that-soil-and-groundwater-salinization-is-the-predominant-cause-of-land-fallowing Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jun 27 15:56:20 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:56:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Auburn Journal- McClintock vows to protect Norcal water rights in wake of bill threat Message-ID: http://auburnjournal.com/detail/181875.html?content_source=&category_id=2&search_filter=&user_id=&event_mode=&event_ts_from=&event_ts_to=&list_type=&order_by=&order_sort=&content_class=1&sub_type=&town_id= McClintock vows to protect Norcal water rights in wake of bill threat By Gus Thomson, Journal Staff Writer Tom McClintock U.S. Rep. Tom McClintock is taking a tough stance on area-of-origin water rights protection in the wake of concerns over a newly introduced bill intended to guarantee water for Central Valley agricultural interests. McClintock, R-Roseville, is chairman of the House water and power subcommittee, which held hearings earlier this month on the controversial San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act proposed by southern California Republican congressman Devin Nunes. But Northern California opposition grew as water providers with rights to Sierra flows began to look over language that raised concerns over the potential loss of long-held entitlements. ?I intervened to stop the bill and announced it wouldn?t proceed to fully protect California from a water grab,? McClintock said. McClintock said the bill would never clear his committee unless it had full protections for long-held Northern California water rights. The congressman said that he fully understands the need to find a solution to provide Central Valley farms with water instead of allowing it to flow into the Pacific Ocean. ?But we will move that legislation only when all parties are satisfied that water rights are fully protected,? he said. ?It will stay (in committee) until it is fixed.? McClintock said that ample Sierra snow storage this year should provide plenty of water for the Bay-Delta as well as agriculture this year. Last year, 200 billion gallons of water flowed into the Pacific while 250,000 acres of farmland went without because of recent regulations lawmakers are now grappling with, he said. ?Fortunately we have a surplus of water this year so it won?t be an issue and we have the luxury of time,? McClintock said. The Placer County Water Agency learned of the legislation and determined that it was a threat to water rights, said Director of Strategic Planning Einar Maisch. ?We expressed our concerns to Congressman McClintock and got a very good response,? Maisch said. ?What we?ve seen is an attempt by (Southern California) export interests to steal our water and I appreciate the congressman?s defense of our water rights.? The Mountain Counties Water Resources Association, which represents water interests from all or part of 15 counties from Lassen to Fresno, is also getting assurances from McClintock ? a former Southern California resident ? that he has their interests in mind. ?The association, at the request of Congressman McClintock?s office, will look to propose language to protect our members? interest relevant to local water-right protection,? Executive Director John Kingsbury said. U.S. Rep. Wally Herger, R-Chico, is also opposing the bill?s water rights stance. Herger said it would negatively impact Northern California water rights while preempting state water law. ?As I have long stated, California?s area-of-origin protections are clear and unambiguous ? our water needs must be met first, before excess water is allowed to flow south,? Herger said. Herger said Nunes is now committed to working with Northern California interests to address their concerns. ?I agree with Congressman Nunes? desire to address the ESA-driven water shortages that have needlessly devastated family farmers and the economy of rural California,? Herger said. ?However, my primary responsibility in Congress is to the North State, and any legislation designed to address these problems must fully protect and respect Northern California?s superior water rights.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9861 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 28 11:20:46 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:20:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam removal plan References: Message-ID: <905AE39E-5A52-4B94-A4B9-9F6B847747BA@att.net> Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam removal plan http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-klamath-20110625,0,938010.story $1.4-billion project ? dismantling four hydroelectric dams to restore Chinook salmon runs in the upper Klamath River ? amounts to an experiment with no guarantee of success, independent report says. June 25, 2011 A $1.4-billion project to remove four hydroelectric dams and restore habitat to return Chinook salmon to the upper reaches of the Klamath River amounts to an experiment with no guarantee of success, an independent science review has concluded. A panel of experts evaluating the proposal expressed "strong reservations" that the effort could overcome the many environmental pressures that have driven the dramatic decline of what was one of the richest salmon rivers in the nation. Even after the decommission of dams that have for decades blocked migrating salmon, the panel said, biologists would probably have to truck the fish around a stretch of the river plagued by low oxygen levels. "I think there's no way in hell they're going to solve" the basin's water-quality problems, said Wim Kimmerer, an environmental research professor at San Francisco State, one of six experts who reviewed the plan. "It doesn't seem to me like they've thought about the big picture very much." Over the last century, the Klamath's waters have been diverted for irrigation, polluted by runoff and dammed for hydropower. The number of fall-run Chinook that swim up the river and its tributaries to spawn has in some years amounted to fewer than 20,000, compared to historic populations of half a million. The plummeting levels of native fish have pitted farmers against environmentalists and tribes whose traditional cultures and diets revolved around salmon fishing. Many of the warring parties last year signed two agreements intended to bring peace to the river, which winds from southern Oregon through the Cascade and Coast ranges to California's Pacific Coast. One of the pacts calls for the removal, starting in 2020, of four hydropower dams operated by PacifiCorp, a subsidiary of billionaire Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway empire. The other includes fishery restoration programs as well as promises of a certain level of water deliveries to Klamath basin farmers and two wildlife refuges that are important stopovers for migrating birds. The dam removal must still be approved by Congress and the U.S. secretary of the Interior, who will rely on reviews by the independent panel, federal agencies and others to determine if the decommissioning is in the public interest. The scientists' June 13 report describes the proposals as a "major step forward" that could boost the salmon population by about 10% in parts of the upper basin. But to achieve that, the panel cautions, the project must tackle vexing problems, including poor water quality and fish disease. The report concluded that the agreement doesn't adequately address those issues. Under the proposal, vegetation in restored wetlands and stream banks would be expected to absorb the phosphorus from natural and agricultural sources that promotes harmful algal blooms. But such a method, Kimmerer said, would require converting an area roughly equivalent to 40% of the irrigated farmland in the Upper Klamath Lake watershed to wetlands. "This does not seem like a feasible level of effort," the report notes. Dennis Lynch, who is overseeing a team of federal scientists gathering information on the effects of dam removal, said his group agrees that major water-quality problems will take decades to fix. But the federal scientists are more optimistic that they can be resolved. "I think they were pretty conservative in their analysis," Lynch said of the panel's report. There are other options for controlling nutrients, he added, such as using chemicals to bind phosphorus to lake bed sediments or mechanically scooping up algae. And new federal and state pollution standards are expected to reduce runoff contamination in coming decades. "All of us involved in this would agree more needs to be done," said Steve Rothert of American Rivers, one of the groups that signed the pact. But "by removing the dams, we're removing the biggest obstacle to upstream migration and productivity." The agreements have strong critics, including the Hoopa Valley tribe, which refused to sign. "The agricultural practices that led to salmon being threatened in the system are the agricultural practices that will be continued," argued Thomas Schlosser, a Seattle attorney who represents the tribe. He cited provisions that call for the continued leasing of wildlife refuge lands for farming and substantial water diversions for irrigation. The agreements require nearly $1 billion in federal funding for water management, habitat restoration and monitoring efforts. PacifiCorp customers in Oregon and California are expected to pay $200 million more to dismantle the dams, and if necessary the state of California would provide as much as $250 million in bond money. "If federal taxpayers are going to be asked to spend this kind of money, it better be for a program that works," said Steve Pedery of Oregon Wild, which favors taking a significant amount of cropland out of production to reduce water demand. Schlosser said he doubts Congress will approve the legislation, which proponents expect to be introduced this summer. But he predicted that the utility will eventually remove the dams anyway because demolition is cheaper than building the fish passages required to renew federal licenses. bettina.boxall at latimes.com Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Tue Jun 28 11:35:09 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:35:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Internship needed Message-ID: Hi All, Well my internship with the City of Chico's Managers office for the summer fell through due to another intern staying on for the summer. As such, I need to find another potential internship, to garner experience within the field of public management, and complete the required hours preferably before this summer's end, if not by the end of next semester which will be my last as I'll be graduating. At this time I have no other leads or connections to an internship and really need one, as I must complete 120 hours of work in order to graduate. If you or someone you know may have use for an intern, that will provide ample opportunity for experience and learning, please contact me. My background is in natural resources planning, Native American studies, geology, natural disasters, and public administration. Attached is a copy of my resume for reference. Thank you for your consideration in this matter! Joshua Allen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Resume_JAllen_0411.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 35267 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 28 15:19:10 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:19:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two opposing Op-Ed's from Two Rivers Tribune on Hoopa Commercial Fishing Message-ID: <249E6970-C72B-43CD-B96C-461ECC04FBF7@att.net> OP-ED-Fishing for the Future (Danny Jordan-Hoopa, Calif.) http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/05/op-ed-fishing-for-the-future-danny-jordan-hoopa-calif/ By DANNY JORNDAN, Hoopa Valley Tribal Self Governance Coordinator and Hoopa Tribal Fisherman Several Federal Courts have interpreted federally reserved Indian fishing rights as being a right to: ?Up to 50% of the harvestable fish or the amount needed to accommodate a moderate standard of living, whichever is less. I was recently asked: Who defines Indian fish needs based on a moderate standard of living? The answer ? The Tribe does. Under the existing federal trust responsibility standards the Hoopa Tribe is legally entitled to our share of 50% of fish that is produced by the Klamath and Trinity Rivers. However, if the referendum passes then the Tribe will have formally given up its allocation right in order to accept a lesser amount of fish. This decision will have far reaching impacts on the Trinity River, the Federal Government?s trust obligations to the Tribe, and the extent that future generations of Hoopa members continue to have meaningful fishing and water rights. I pushed for the referendum language regarding commercial fishing in 1989. The referendum was placed on the ballot 11 years prior to signing the Trinity River Record of Decision. At that time, we needed to know how aggressively that the Tribe wanted to fight the Central Valley irrigators and Federal Government in order to restore the fish populations that were damaged by construction of the Trinity River Dam. Based on the approved referendum, the Tribe mounted one of its more aggressive fights against the Federal Government and Central Valley water users to get water turned back to the Trinity River. However, if the 1989 referendum been voted down then, it is likely that the Federal Government and Central Valley irrigators would have had justification for only delivering enough water that was needed to provide for minimal populations of fish. But, the 1989 referendum did pass and a team of Hoopa tribal members and highly skilled fishery and water experts ended up delivering the Trinity River Record of Decision, which was signed in Hoopa on December 19, 2000. The Trinity ROD and the Tribe?s aggressive fight to restore the fish populations are the basis for the largest transfer of water ever done in California?s history when 268,000 acre feet of water annually was delivered back to the Trinity River. The Hoopa Tribe has signed 2 treaties with the United States. The first was in 1864 and the second was the Trinity ROD in December, 2000. We all know how the first 1864 treaty turned out. At first the Hoopa homeland was set aside and the Hoopa people thought their land, resources and rights would be protected forever. But in 1891, the United States decided to change its agreement with the Hoopa Tribe by adding the ?extension? to the Hoopa Square. What followed was the Federal Government and Jessie Short lawyers carrying out decades of challenges to the existence and ownership rights to the Hoopa Tribe to our homeland and its resources. Contrary to its commitments made to the Tribe under the 1864 treaty, the Federal Government turned out to be a ruthless opponent against the Tribe by draining our funds, attempted to steal Hoopa?s land, restrict our rights, and destroy our Tribal Government. In the end, the Hoopa Tribe fought to get the Hoopa-Yurok Settlement Act enacted by Congress that once again promised to protect the Hoopa homeland from outside attacks. The unfortunate reality is that the conditions that were placed on the Hoopa Tribe for getting our land back were that the Tribe had to give away $10?s of millions to buy our land back. Another unfortunately reality the same story can be told over and over again by Indian people around the Nation where the Federal Government has set aside its promises and legal obligations to Indian people in order provide more benefits to its non-Indian political allies. The second Hoopa treaty was entered into on December 19, 2000, when the Trinity River Record of Decision (ROD) was signed. Again, the ROD treaty was the basis of returning 268,000 acre feet of water back to the Trinity River, the largest water transfer in California history. The legal basis for the ROD treaty is expressed in the Congressional law that was enacted by the Hoopa Tribe in 1992 that states: ?In order to meet the federal trust responsibilities to protect the fishery resources of the Hoopa Valley Tribe?? This time, however, it may be that the Tribe will be giving up its rights that are protected under the ROD treaty. Instead of continuing to fight for the levels of fish that have been directed by Congress and Federal Courts, is the Tribe willing to reduce our fishing rights and accept less than what we are legally entitled to? It must be clearly understood that giving up commercial fishing rights represents an agreement by the Tribe to give up a portion of our federally reserved fishing rights ? and possibly the amount of Trinity River water that would have been needed to support a higher population of fish. We need to clearly understand that we are engaging in the ?use it or lose it? policy discussion that will be used against the Tribe by Federal judges, Federal agency representatives and non-Indian agricultural interests in the future. The ?use it or lose it? policy is not one that I dreamed up. Instead, it is included in Federal Court orders when interpreting Indian rights. For those who do not believe that the ?use it or lose it? policy is real only need to ask themselves why the Karuk and Klamath Tribes do not have fishing rights to anadromous fish in the Klamath River today? The answer is that both tribes were not able to protect their aboriginal fishing rights against the aggressive attacks of the Federal Government who wanted their rights stripped away. We also need to ask ourselves why the Federal Government is demanding that tribes waive their fishing and water rights in the KBRA? Again, the answer is that the Federal Government is not interested in protecting senior Indian rights when water is in so high demand by non-Indian irrigators in the Upper Klamath and Central Valley areas. Both the Federal Government and non-Indian irrigators need Indian people to give up their rights in order for them to secure their own permanent senior legal rights to already over allocated water supplies. I have provided the Tribal Council and Fish Commission information that demonstrates that the State of California will need 40% more water by 2030 than is presently available. State and Federal agencies are presently designing water conveyance systems around the San Francisco Delta that will make it easier to deliver Trinity water to Los Angeles and San Diego. Giving up Indian fishing rights today will only lead to giving up water rights in the future. We only need to look at the endless violations of every treaty that was ever entered into between Indian tribes and the United States to understand that protecting Indian rights is a low priority for our Federal trustee agencies. There should be no misunderstanding that the fishing and water rights of future tribal members will be impacted by the upcoming referendum to modify the Tribe?s fishing rights. Op-Ed (Dania Rose Colegrove-Commercial Fishing) http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/06/op-ed-dania-rose-colegrove-commercial-fishing/ Thank you to all the Hoopa Tribal members that helped out and signed the petition to get the Commercial Fishing issue and question on the Hoopa Valley Tribal General Election ballot. Remember to VOTE NO on commercial fishing on Tuesday, June 21, 2011. We believe commercial fishing is not compatible with the cultural and environmental traditions of the Hoopa Valley People. We want to protect our river for cultural and subsistence purposes only! We do not approve of the harvesting of salmon for sale for individual financial gain without regard to the subsistence and cultural ways of the Hupa people. We believe in order to preserve our way of life in the Hupa way we need to protect our environment, our river, and our fish. When a handful of people took the liberty to commercial fish the Gorge of the Trinity River, 7 days a week, 24 hours a day with no day of rest, setting nets completely from shore to shore without regard for salmon runs entering the upriver Hoopa Valley, denying the Hupa people of the their right to enjoy their traditional way of life, and all for individual financial gain, the Hupa people were outraged and called upon the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council to act. The Hoopa Valley Tribal Council failed to act on these irresponsible and poor fishing practices, they failed to impose a moratorium and made the decision that commercial fishing would be allowed on the Hoopa Valley Reservation?s Trinity River unregulated. Tribal members were disappointed that the Tribal Council allowed these atrocities to continue, when they clearly affect our daily lives, our cultural and religious values and our traditional way of life for years to come. We the people decided that we will be a part of the decision making process! Therefore, we packed a petition to place the commercial fishing question on the Hoopa Valley Tribe?s General Election ballot for a referendum vote. The petition passed with 426 signatures. Please vote no on Commercial fishing on June 21. The following except was taken from a January 24 news article published by the High Country News. It sheds some light on the truth behind why certain powerful people are fiercely protecting an unregulated commercial fishery. According to records from the tribal police and a wholesale fish company, Mike Orcutt, the director of the tribal fisheries department, has made more money from the commercial fishery than anyone else on the reservation. Daniel Jordan, the director of the tribe?s self-governance office, which advises the tribal council, has also sold fish off the reservation, as have at least three other fisheries department employees. And many Hupas charge that Orcutt, Jordan and other fisheries employees did their best to conceal the fact that there were opportunities to market the fish. ?This was a clandestine commercial fishery,? says Lyle Marshall, a former tribal chairman. ?And if you look at the list of people who fished, they?re either employees of the fisheries department or their relatives; or the (tribal) chairman?s relatives; or the self-governance director?s relatives. Nobody else knew about it.? Many tribal members? bitterness has been stoked by the fact that, as fisheries director, Orcutt already makes close to $100,000 a year. In 2009, Orcutt, his brother, Kevin, and his wife, Vivienna, sold more than 800 fish to Wild Planet, for about $32,000. Last year, the family made $19,000 selling fish to the company ? accounting for more than half the fish that Hupa tribe members sold to it. The petition reads: We the undersigned members of the Hoopa Valley Tribe, and citizens of the Hoopa Nation, hereby petition the Election Board to conduct a Referendum Election to overturn the July 1989 referendum resolution 89-104 in order to reinstate the ban on commercial fishing found in the Tribe?s Fishing Ordinance in its entirely. The July 1989 Referendum on Resolution 89-104, provides for commercial fishing on the Hoopa Valley Reservation. In order to ensure and enhance the preservation of the Cultural and Traditional Hoopa Tribal fishing rights, commercial fishing shall not continue. The question that will appear on the June 21, 2001 General Election ballot reads: Shall the Hoopa Valley Tribe continue commercial fishing on the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1724nocommercialfishing.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 44513 bytes Desc: not available URL: From summerhillfarmpv at aol.com Tue Jun 28 15:28:25 2011 From: summerhillfarmpv at aol.com (summerhillfarmpv at aol.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:28:25 EDT Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam remova... Message-ID: <8fc6b.2567f2e5.3b3baf89@aol.com> Below is Glen Spain's (of PCFFA0 response to this article to a more national listserve. Since I've been engaged in this process for 7 years it is important to understand what Glen says. It is also important to understand that the scientists did say the agreement was good for fish and the river. As with all scientists, there are differing views, and the agreement is not intended to fix ALL problems, only those that were negotiated. Mark Rockwell Colleagues... Steve Pedery of Oregon Wild posted this skeptical article to this ESC list, of course, because Oregon Wild opposes the Klamath Settlement Agreement and are still seeking to sway opinions of groups on this list to that viewpoint. They are of course entitled to that view, but there are also countervailing views that should be considered. There are several other groups on this ESC list (including PCFFA) who strongly support the Klamath Settlement Agreement as well, and do not see any reason in the Expert Panel's analysis to change that view. There are quite a few key omissions in this article, which I have to rate as not one of Bettina's best. For instance, the article fails to convey the first and most important conclusion made by the independent scientists who provided their review: ?The Proposed Action [Klamath restoration settlements] appears to be a major step forward in conserving target fish populations compared with decades of vigorous disagreements, obvious fish passage barriers and continued ecological degradation.? The Chinook Panel Report also did not express ?strong reservation? about dam removal as such, nor whether dam removal would help fish, as the story suggests. Instead, the scientists expressed concern primarily about whether such a big restoration could be effectively implemented and how much it would help fish given other constraints such as poor water quality. These are always factors to be considered and worked through in any restoration project. None of this is particularly surprising. But the Chinook Panel Report also did not assess the many parallel TMDL water quality restoration efforts being made in the Klamath Basin through other forums such as the Clean Water Act and equivalent state laws. This was outside the scope of their limited assignment since none of these are directly connected to the KBRA. It should be remembered that implementation of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) was never intended to address all the water quality issues in the basin. The KBRA is instead intended to work in concert with the States of California and Oregon as they improve water quality through their own separate Clean Water Act authorities and TMDLs, which separately address those problems. To that end the KBRA budget does contain about $50 million in TMDL implementation funds, not to mention some $120 million for improving water quality and habitat generally through a number of restoration programs with a 50-year scope. All that will help -- but it does not supplant Clean Water Act authorities, nor replace them, in any way. The Clean Water Act represents a separate legal track. To my mind the Expert Panel Report raises some important cautions, but presents no reason not to proceed with dam removal under the current Klamath Settlement Agreement. The alternatives, such as they are -- in the view of Settlement supporters and many scientists -- are all far less certain and far less likely to achieve any of the same Klamath Basin restoration results as the Settlement now on the table and beginning to be implemented. If anyone wants more information on this issue, or to once again debate the pros and cons of the (already signed) Klamath Settlement Agreement, please contact me separately as this is not a debate appropriate to this ESC list. Thanks. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 In a message dated 6/28/2011 11:21:12 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam removal plan _http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-klamath-20110625,0,938010.story_ (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-klamath-20110625,0,938010.story) $1.4-billion project ? dismantling four hydroelectric dams to restore Chinook salmon runs in the upper Klamath River ? amounts to an experiment with no guarantee of success, independent report says. June 25, 2011 A $1.4-billion project to remove _four hydroelectric dams_ (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/30/local/me-klamath30) and restore habitat to return Chinook salmon to the upper reaches of the Klamath River amounts to an experiment with no guarantee of success, an independent science review has concluded. A panel of experts evaluating the proposal expressed "strong reservations" that the effort could overcome the many environmental pressures that have driven the dramatic decline of what was one of the richest salmon rivers in the nation. Even after the decommission of dams that have for decades blocked migrating salmon, the panel said, biologists would probably have to truck the fish around a stretch of the river plagued by low oxygen levels. "I think there's no way in hell they're going to solve" the basin's water-quality problems, said Wim Kimmerer, an environmental research professor at San Francisco State, one of six experts who reviewed the plan. "It doesn't seem to me like they've thought about the big picture very much." Over the last century, the Klamath's waters have been diverted for irrigation, polluted by runoff and dammed for hydropower. The number of fall-run Chinook that swim up the river and its tributaries to spawn has in some years amounted to fewer than 20,000, compared to historic populations of half a million. The plummeting levels of native fish have pitted farmers against environmentalists and tribes whose traditional cultures and diets revolved around salmon fishing. Many of the warring parties last year signed two agreements intended to bring peace to the river, which winds from southern Oregon through the Cascade and Coast ranges to California's Pacific Coast. One of the pacts calls for the removal, starting in 2020, of four hydropower dams operated by _PacifiCorp_ (http://www.latimes.com/topic/economy-business-finance/pacificorp-ORCRP011688.topic) , a subsidiary of billionaire _Warren Buffett_ (http://www.latimes.com/topic/economy-business-finance/financial-business-services/warren-buffett-PEBSL000005.topic) 's _Berkshire Hathaway_ (http://www.latimes.com/topic/economy-business-finance/berkshire-hathaway-incorporated-ORCRP001814.topic) empire. The other includes fishery restoration programs as well as promises of a certain level of water deliveries to Klamath basin farmers and two wildlife refuges that are important stopovers for migrating birds. The dam removal must still be approved by Congress and the U.S. secretary of the Interior, who will rely on reviews by the independent panel, federal agencies and others to determine if the decommissioning is in the public interest. The _scientists' June 13 report_ (http://klamathrestoration.gov/sites/klamathrestoration.gov/files/FINAL%20Report_Chinook%20Salmon_Klamath%20Expert%20P anels_06%2013%2011.pdf) describes the proposals as a "major step forward" that could boost the salmon population by about 10% in parts of the upper basin. But to achieve that, the panel cautions, the project must tackle vexing problems, including poor water quality and fish disease. The report concluded that the agreement doesn't adequately address those issues. Under the proposal, vegetation in restored wetlands and stream banks would be expected to absorb the phosphorus from natural and agricultural sources that promotes harmful algal blooms. But such a method, Kimmerer said, would require converting an area roughly equivalent to 40% of the irrigated farmland in the Upper Klamath Lake watershed to wetlands. "This does not seem like a feasible level of effort," the report notes. Dennis Lynch, who is overseeing a team of _federal scientists gathering information_ (http://klamathrestoration.gov/sites/klamathrestoration.gov/files/SD%20Fish%20Synthesis%2006-13-2011%20FINAL.pdf) on the effects of dam removal, said his group agrees that major water-quality problems will take decades to fix. But the federal scientists are more optimistic that they can be resolved. "I think they were pretty conservative in their analysis," Lynch said of the panel's report. There are other options for controlling nutrients, he added, such as using chemicals to bind phosphorus to lake bed sediments or mechanically scooping up algae. And new federal and state _pollution standards_ (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/05/local/la-me-salmon-klamath-20110105) are expected to reduce runoff contamination in coming decades. "All of us involved in this would agree more needs to be done," said Steve Rothert of American Rivers, one of the groups that signed the pact. But "by removing the dams, we're removing the biggest obstacle to upstream migration and productivity." The agreements have strong critics, including the Hoopa Valley tribe, which refused to sign. "The agricultural practices that led to salmon being threatened in the system are the agricultural practices that will be continued," argued Thomas Schlosser, a Seattle attorney who represents the tribe. He cited provisions that call for the continued leasing of wildlife refuge lands for farming and substantial water diversions for irrigation. The agreements require nearly $1 billion in federal funding for water management, habitat restoration and monitoring efforts. PacifiCorp customers in Oregon and California are expected to pay $200 million more to dismantle the dams, and if necessary the state of California would provide as much as $250 million in bond money. "If federal taxpayers are going to be asked to spend this kind of money, it better be for a program that works," said Steve Pedery of Oregon Wild, which favors taking a significant amount of cropland out of production to reduce water demand. Schlosser said he doubts Congress will approve the legislation, which proponents expect to be introduced this summer. But he predicted that the utility will eventually remove the dams anyway because demolition is cheaper than building the fish passages required to renew federal licenses. _bettina.boxall at latimes.com_ (mailto:bettina.boxall at latimes.com) Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 _tstokely at att.net_ (mailto:tstokely at att.net) http://www.c-win.org = _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gking at asis.com Tue Jun 28 15:44:04 2011 From: gking at asis.com (Greg King) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:44:04 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam removal plan In-Reply-To: <905AE39E-5A52-4B94-A4B9-9F6B847747BA@att.net> References: <905AE39E-5A52-4B94-A4B9-9F6B847747BA@att.net> Message-ID: Tom, The findings are not surprising, and echo some of the obvious points that several of us raised during dam removal negotiations. One of these points is illustrated with unintended irony when Kimmerer says that absorbing toxic ag runoff "would require converting an area roughly equivalent to 40% of the irrigated farmland in the Upper Klamath Lake watershed to wetlands." I think what the author meant was returning the irrigated farmland to wetlands, a necessary evolution that is made all but impossible by the KBRA. During negotiations Oregon Wild, WaterWatch, Hoopa, Friends of the River and the NEC consistently underscored the several mechanisms in the KBRA that would continue to leave the refuges literally high and dry, and toxic. We also argued, to no avail, for effective measures to repair and protect the devastated Keno Reach of the Klamath River, which indeed is anoxic up to three months of the year, is a cesspool of industrial ag runoff, and has been the site of several fish kills.* That said, this report does not and cannot suffice as an argument for leaving dams in place. Indeed, the dams should come down and upper basin issues of water diversions and toxicity should be addressed and rectified. That is the primary failure of the KBRA, that it does not provide for both mechanisms, a fact well illustrated in the report. (In fact, the KBRA does not provide for either mechanism, as it does not require dam removal.) I am in agreement with Rothert's quote (below), but as a significant architect of the KBRA Rothert is partly responsible for the massive giveaway to farmers represented by the deal. *The KBRA provides a token nod to restoration of the Keno Reach, including minimal funding and the requirement that "The Parties shall support terms in the Hydropower Agreement requiring that PacifiCorp provide funds to Reclamation to address water quality impacts associated with Keno Dam after transfer to Reclamation." But there are no provisions for altering the agricultural practices that have devastated Keno in the first place. In fact, these practices are reinforced: Section 8.2.2 of the KBRA solidifies business as usual in the Keno Reach, while passing along to taxpayers the costs of bad ag practices: "The Parties support the following term in the federal Authorizing Legislation: 'The Secretary is authorized to take title to Keno Dam and any necessary associated real property from PacifiCorp in the course of implementing the Klamath Hydroelectric Project Settlement Agreement subject to the conditions defined in Sections __ of the Hydroelectric Project Settlement Agreement; provided, however, the Bureau of Reclamation shall maintain water levels for diversion and to maintain canals above Keno Dam consistent with historic practices and in compliance with applicable law. Klamath Reclamation Project contractors shall not bear any cost associated with Keno Dam or any related lands or facilities whether cost of operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, betterment, liabilities of any kind, or otherwise.? (emphasis in the original) Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gking at asis.com http://siskiyouland.wordpress.com/ On Jun 28, 2011, at 11:20 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam removal plan > > http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me- > klamath-20110625,0,938010.story > > $1.4-billion project ? dismantling four hydroelectric dams to > restore Chinook salmon runs in the upper Klamath River ? amounts to > an experiment with no guarantee of success, independent report says. > > > June 25, 2011 > > A $1.4-billion project to remove four hydroelectric dams and > restore habitat to return Chinook salmon to the upper reaches of > the Klamath River amounts to an experiment with no guarantee of > success, an independent science review has concluded. > > A panel of experts evaluating the proposal expressed "strong > reservations" that the effort could overcome the many environmental > pressures that have driven the dramatic decline of what was one of > the richest salmon rivers in the nation. > > Even after the decommission of dams that have for decades blocked > migrating salmon, the panel said, biologists would probably have to > truck the fish around a stretch of the river plagued by low oxygen > levels. > > "I think there's no way in hell they're going to solve" the basin's > water-quality problems, said Wim Kimmerer, an environmental > research professor at San Francisco State, one of six experts who > reviewed the plan. "It doesn't seem to me like they've thought > about the big picture very much." > > Over the last century, the Klamath's waters have been diverted for > irrigation, polluted by runoff and dammed for hydropower. The > number of fall-run Chinook that swim up the river and its > tributaries to spawn has in some years amounted to fewer than > 20,000, compared to historic populations of half a million. > > The plummeting levels of native fish have pitted farmers against > environmentalists and tribes whose traditional cultures and diets > revolved around salmon fishing. > > Many of the warring parties last year signed two agreements > intended to bring peace to the river, which winds from southern > Oregon through the Cascade and Coast ranges to California's Pacific > Coast. > > One of the pacts calls for the removal, starting in 2020, of four > hydropower dams operated by PacifiCorp, a subsidiary of billionaire > Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway empire. The other includes > fishery restoration programs as well as promises of a certain level > of water deliveries to Klamath basin farmers and two wildlife > refuges that are important stopovers for migrating birds. > > The dam removal must still be approved by Congress and the U.S. > secretary of the Interior, who will rely on reviews by the > independent panel, federal agencies and others to determine if the > decommissioning is in the public interest. > > The scientists' June 13 report describes the proposals as a "major > step forward" that could boost the salmon population by about 10% > in parts of the upper basin. But to achieve that, the panel > cautions, the project must tackle vexing problems, including poor > water quality and fish disease. > > The report concluded that the agreement doesn't adequately address > those issues. Under the proposal, vegetation in restored wetlands > and stream banks would be expected to absorb the phosphorus from > natural and agricultural sources that promotes harmful algal > blooms. But such a method, Kimmerer said, would require converting > an area roughly equivalent to 40% of the irrigated farmland in the > Upper Klamath Lake watershed to wetlands. > > "This does not seem like a feasible level of effort," the report > notes. > > Dennis Lynch, who is overseeing a team of federal scientists > gathering information on the effects of dam removal, said his group > agrees that major water-quality problems will take decades to fix. > But the federal scientists are more optimistic that they can be > resolved. > > "I think they were pretty conservative in their analysis," Lynch > said of the panel's report. There are other options for controlling > nutrients, he added, such as using chemicals to bind phosphorus to > lake bed sediments or mechanically scooping up algae. And new > federal and state pollution standards are expected to reduce runoff > contamination in coming decades. > > "All of us involved in this would agree more needs to be done," > said Steve Rothert of American Rivers, one of the groups that > signed the pact. But "by removing the dams, we're removing the > biggest obstacle to upstream migration and productivity." > > The agreements have strong critics, including the Hoopa Valley > tribe, which refused to sign. "The agricultural practices that led > to salmon being threatened in the system are the agricultural > practices that will be continued," argued Thomas Schlosser, a > Seattle attorney who represents the tribe. He cited provisions that > call for the continued leasing of wildlife refuge lands for farming > and substantial water diversions for irrigation. > > The agreements require nearly $1 billion in federal funding for > water management, habitat restoration and monitoring efforts. > PacifiCorp customers in Oregon and California are expected to pay > $200 million more to dismantle the dams, and if necessary the state > of California would provide as much as $250 million in bond money. > > "If federal taxpayers are going to be asked to spend this kind of > money, it better be for a program that works," said Steve Pedery of > Oregon Wild, which favors taking a significant amount of cropland > out of production to reduce water demand. > > Schlosser said he doubts Congress will approve the legislation, > which proponents expect to be introduced this summer. But he > predicted that the utility will eventually remove the dams anyway > because demolition is cheaper than building the fish passages > required to renew federal licenses. > > bettina.boxall at latimes.com > > > Tom Stokely > Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact > California Water Impact Network > V/FAX 530-926-9727 > Cell 530-524-0315 > tstokely at att.net > http://www.c-win.org > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -- Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gking at asis.com http://siskiyouland.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Tue Jun 28 16:18:03 2011 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 19:18:03 EDT Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam remova... Message-ID: <2bee9.241e81b8.3b3bbb2b@aol.com> All..... Actually, very much has been made by this rather inaccurate LA Times article, including the recent comments below by Greg King. I consider Greg a friend, but he is making a common mistake so many make by demanding that the KBRA be all things and all solutions to all problems in the basin. Then blaming it when it cannot be. This article is also highly inaccurate in what it excludes. For instance, the article fails to convey the first and most important conclusion made by the independent scientists who provided their review: ?The Proposed Action [Klamath restoration settlements] appears to be a major step forward in conserving target fish populations compared with decades of vigorous disagreements, obvious fish passage barriers and continued ecological degradation.? The Chinook Panel Report also did not express ?strong reservation? about dam removal as such, nor whether dam removal would help fish, as the story suggests. Instead, the scientists expressed concern primarily about whether such a big restoration could be effectively implemented, also mentioning various limiting factors such as poor water quality that are not directly addressed by the KBRA in isolation. Of course, any project of this magnitude will be challenging. But the Chinook Panel Report also did not assess the many parallel water quality restoration efforts being made in the Klamath Basin through other forums. This was outside the scope of their limited assignment because these are linked to the Clean Water Act and equivalent state laws -- NOT to the KBRA. The KBRA operates in the context of all of these other laws and restoration actions, not instead of them. The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) alone was never intended to address all the water quality issues in the basin. The KBRA is instead intended to work in concert with the States of California and Oregon as they improve water quality through their own separate Clean Water Act authorities. Both California and Oregon now have specific, published and EPA approved water quality goals (TMDLs) they will both pursue over the next 50 years in order to address the very water quality issues raised by the Chinook Panel Report. Also, while the KBRA does not create these parallel programs, the KBRA budget does include some $50 million for implementing numerous other actions to improve water-quality throughout the river the next 15 years, and $120 million for improving water quality through the restoration of aquatic habitat, upland areas, and wetlands in the upper basin. Thus many of the water quality problems raised by the Panel are likely to be addressed so salmon can return to the upper basin once more. Finally, many other water quality improvement actions are already underway because of the Klamath agreements that would not otherwise be occurring, including pilot projects and studies of measures to reduce nutrient levels in the river, and active monitoring of water quality over 250 river miles by the Karuk and Yurok Tribes. These are being paid for through the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement, not the KBRA. In short, the article unfortunately misses the forest for the trees. Multiple scientific review panel reports have been released over the past several months, and the cumulative message from the dozens of scientists involved in analyzing whether the KBRA/dam removal and associated restoration actions will benefit fish, water quality and everyone who relies on a healthy Klamath River is that they will. A full scientific view requires consideration of all the science, which can be easily located at: _www.klamathrestoration.gov_ (http://www.klamathrestoration.gov) . Taking this one report out of context is not really very helpful. The bottom line is that there is always going to be debate over how far the Klamath Settlement Agreements will advance salmon restoration, at least until those measures are fully implemented. But doing nothing is also not a viable option, and would be a death knell for Klamath salmon fisheries and the many communities that depend upon them. Many are using this LA Times article as "proof" that dam removal should not even be tried. I must reject the road of inaction, as that leads only to more of what we saw last decade, with no resolutions in sight. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com In a message dated 6/28/2011 3:43:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, gking at asis.com writes: Tom, The findings are not surprising, and echo some of the obvious points that several of us raised during dam removal negotiations. One of these points is illustrated with unintended irony when Kimmerer says that absorbing toxic ag runoff "would require converting an area roughly equivalent to 40% of the irrigated farmland in the Upper Klamath Lake watershed to wetlands." I think what the author meant was returning the irrigated farmland to wetlands, a necessary evolution that is made all but impossible by the KBRA. During negotiations Oregon Wild, WaterWatch, Hoopa, Friends of the River and the NEC consistently underscored the several mechanisms in the KBRA that would continue to leave the refuges literally high and dry, and toxic. We also argued, to no avail, for effective measures to repair and protect the devastated Keno Reach of the Klamath River, which indeed is anoxic up to three months of the year, is a cesspool of industrial ag runoff, and has been the site of several fish kills.* That said, this report does not and cannot suffice as an argument for leaving dams in place. Indeed, the dams should come down and upper basin issues of water diversions and toxicity should be addressed and rectified. That is the primary failure of the KBRA, that it does not provide for both mechanisms, a fact well illustrated in the report. (In fact, the KBRA does not provide for either mechanism, as it does not require dam removal.) I am in agreement with Rothert's quote (below), but as a significant architect of the KBRA Rothert is partly responsible for the massive giveaway to farmers represented by the deal. *The KBRA provides a token nod to restoration of the Keno Reach, including minimal funding and the requirement that "The Parties shall support terms in the Hydropower Agreement requiring that PacifiCorp provide funds to Reclamation to address water quality impacts associated with Keno Dam after transfer to Reclamation." But there are no provisions for altering the agricultural practices that have devastated Keno in the first place. In fact, these practices are reinforced: Section 8.2.2 of the KBRA solidifies business as usual in the Keno Reach, while passing along to taxpayers the costs of bad ag practices: "The Parties support the following term in the federal Authorizing Legislation: 'The Secretary is authorized to take title to Keno Dam and any necessary associated real property from PacifiCorp in the course of implementing the Klamath Hydroelectric Project Settlement Agreement subject to the conditions defined in Sections __ of the Hydroelectric Project Settlement Agreement; provided, however, the Bureau of Reclamation shall maintain water levels for diversion and to maintain canals above Keno Dam consistent with historic practices and in compliance with applicable law. Klamath Reclamation Project contractors shall not bear any cost associated with Keno Dam or any related lands or facilities whether cost of operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, betterment, liabilities of any kind, or otherwise.? (emphasis in the original) Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 _707-498-4900_ (tel:707-498-4900) _gking at asis.com_ (mailto:gking at asis.com) _http://siskiyouland.wordpress.com/_ (http://siskiyouland.wordpress.com/) On Jun 28, 2011, at 11:20 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam removal plan _http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-klamath-20110625,0,938010.story_ (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-klamath-20110625,0,938010.story) $1.4-billion project ? dismantling four hydroelectric dams to restore Chinook salmon runs in the upper Klamath River ? amounts to an experiment with no guarantee of success, independent report says. June 25, 2011 A $1.4-billion project to remove _four hydroelectric dams_ (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/30/local/me-klamath30) and restore habitat to return Chinook salmon to the upper reaches of the Klamath River amounts to an experiment with no guarantee of success, an independent science review has concluded. A panel of experts evaluating the proposal expressed "strong reservations" that the effort could overcome the many environmental pressures that have driven the dramatic decline of what was one of the richest salmon rivers in the nation. Even after the decommission of dams that have for decades blocked migrating salmon, the panel said, biologists would probably have to truck the fish around a stretch of the river plagued by low oxygen levels. "I think there's no way in hell they're going to solve" the basin's water-quality problems, said Wim Kimmerer, an environmental research professor at San Francisco State, one of six experts who reviewed the plan. "It doesn't seem to me like they've thought about the big picture very much." Over the last century, the Klamath's waters have been diverted for irrigation, polluted by runoff and dammed for hydropower. The number of fall-run Chinook that swim up the river and its tributaries to spawn has in some years amounted to fewer than 20,000, compared to historic populations of half a million. The plummeting levels of native fish have pitted farmers against environmentalists and tribes whose traditional cultures and diets revolved around salmon fishing. Many of the warring parties last year signed two agreements intended to bring peace to the river, which winds from southern Oregon through the Cascade and Coast ranges to California's Pacific Coast. One of the pacts calls for the removal, starting in 2020, of four hydropower dams operated by _PacifiCorp_ (http://www.latimes.com/topic/economy-business-finance/pacificorp-ORCRP011688.topic) , a subsidiary of billionaire _Warren Buffett_ (http://www.latimes.com/topic/economy-business-finance/financial-business-services/warren-buffett-PEBSL000005.topic) 's _Berkshire Hathaway_ (http://www.latimes.com/topic/economy-business-finance/berkshire-hathaway-incorporated-ORCRP001814.topic) empire. The other includes fishery restoration programs as well as promises of a certain level of water deliveries to Klamath basin farmers and two wildlife refuges that are important stopovers for migrating birds. The dam removal must still be approved by Congress and the U.S. secretary of the Interior, who will rely on reviews by the independent panel, federal agencies and others to determine if the decommissioning is in the public interest. The _scientists' June 13 report_ (http://klamathrestoration.gov/sites/klamathrestoration.gov/files/FINAL%20Report_Chinook%20Salmon_Klamath%20Expert%20P anels_06%2013%2011.pdf) describes the proposals as a "major step forward" that could boost the salmon population by about 10% in parts of the upper basin. But to achieve that, the panel cautions, the project must tackle vexing problems, including poor water quality and fish disease. The report concluded that the agreement doesn't adequately address those issues. Under the proposal, vegetation in restored wetlands and stream banks would be expected to absorb the phosphorus from natural and agricultural sources that promotes harmful algal blooms. But such a method, Kimmerer said, would require converting an area roughly equivalent to 40% of the irrigated farmland in the Upper Klamath Lake watershed to wetlands. "This does not seem like a feasible level of effort," the report notes. Dennis Lynch, who is overseeing a team of _federal scientists gathering information_ (http://klamathrestoration.gov/sites/klamathrestoration.gov/files/SD%20Fish%20Synthesis%2006-13-2011%20FINAL.pdf) on the effects of dam removal, said his group agrees that major water-quality problems will take decades to fix. But the federal scientists are more optimistic that they can be resolved. "I think they were pretty conservative in their analysis," Lynch said of the panel's report. There are other options for controlling nutrients, he added, such as using chemicals to bind phosphorus to lake bed sediments or mechanically scooping up algae. And new federal and state _pollution standards_ (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/05/local/la-me-salmon-klamath-20110105) are expected to reduce runoff contamination in coming decades. "All of us involved in this would agree more needs to be done," said Steve Rothert of American Rivers, one of the groups that signed the pact. But "by removing the dams, we're removing the biggest obstacle to upstream migration and productivity." The agreements have strong critics, including the Hoopa Valley tribe, which refused to sign. "The agricultural practices that led to salmon being threatened in the system are the agricultural practices that will be continued," argued Thomas Schlosser, a Seattle attorney who represents the tribe. He cited provisions that call for the continued leasing of wildlife refuge lands for farming and substantial water diversions for irrigation. The agreements require nearly $1 billion in federal funding for water management, habitat restoration and monitoring efforts. PacifiCorp customers in Oregon and California are expected to pay $200 million more to dismantle the dams, and if necessary the state of California would provide as much as $250 million in bond money. "If federal taxpayers are going to be asked to spend this kind of money, it better be for a program that works," said Steve Pedery of Oregon Wild, which favors taking a significant amount of cropland out of production to reduce water demand. Schlosser said he doubts Congress will approve the legislation, which proponents expect to be introduced this summer. But he predicted that the utility will eventually remove the dams anyway because demolition is cheaper than building the fish passages required to renew federal licenses. _bettina.boxall at latimes.com_ (mailto:bettina.boxall at latimes.com) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 28 18:47:01 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:47:01 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] 2 Rivers Tribune- Election Results Are in, Commercial Fishing is Out Message-ID: <84D43442-B068-4461-A205-58219F5AB713@att.net> Election Results Are in, Commercial Fishing is Out http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/06/election-results-are-in-commercial-fishing-is-out/ Over 880 Hoopa Tribal members voted in the June 21 Hoopa Valley Tribal General Elections. Voters struck down commercial fishing with a record breaking 700 to 162./Photo by Scottie Lee Meyers, Two Rivers Tribune By SCOTTIE LEE MEYERS, Two Rivers Tribune Hoopa Valley tribal member Norma McAdams exited the election booth at Tribal Chambers Tuesday afternoon and said the election felt like good versus evil. ?We will either go down from here or start building,? she said. McAdams was one of 885 (54 percent) tribal members who voted in a election that featured races for Tribal Chairman ? the tribe?s top spot ? and a controversial referendum that asked if commercial fishing should continue on the reservation.The Tribal Chairman race With his phone ringing all night, Masten didn?t stand a chance to sleep Tuesday evening. At 3:30 am he received a call informing him that he had won. Soon the word got out. ?Then the phone really started to ring,? said Masten. He took a shower, brewed some coffee and started to take down his election signs to get his mind off of things. ?I brought stability to tribal entities and a lot of credibility to the tribal membership,? said Masten after being asked why he won. ?And I take a strong stance against drugs. I want the youth to have a choice when they grow up, and one of those isn?t selling drugs.? Lyle Marshall credited Masten?s ability to create alliances, but said that wasn?t entirely why Masten defeated him. ?They did a good job of vilifying me,? said Marshall. ?They did a good job of slinging mud. I don?t buy votes and don?t make promises I can?t keep.? When hearing Marshall?s allegations, Masten laughed and said, ?It?s sick. Especially coming from him, he?s connected to one of the biggest drug dealers in the valley ? but I don?t like to go there. He just can?t say he got beat and go away?? Marshall?s not sure what his political ambitions are at this point. ?Two things happen in an election,? said Marshall. ?You win them or you lose them. But I offer my support to the people who want it. You don?t have to be the chairman to help out. The tribe?s in trouble and we got to pull together anyway.?Among the three district races, Montgomery said he found out the election results on Facebook at 4 am. ?It was the longest night of the year waiting for the results,? he said. Crediting the swing votes to his ability to stay open-minded to new ideas, Montgomery said he?s excited to join the Tribal Council. ?I?m just humbled to contribute to the leadership of the tribe. I want to make the people proud and turn this tribe around.? Hayley Hutt defeated Jennifer George-Lane in the open-seated Agency Field district. And incumbent Byron Nelson Jr., Vice Chairman of the Tribe, defeated Michael Hostler in the Hostler/Matilton district. Joseph Orozco defeat Nena Macias by a wide margin and won a spot on the Elections Board. Orozco said the Elections Board needs to look at strategies for raising voter turnout and to take a closer look at the registration process and absentee ballots. The Elections Board will make the results official after a 10-day period to allow candidates to contest the results. the most compelling election results came from Bald Hill where in a display of political irony, Augustine Montgomery defeated incumbent Oscar Billings by 125 votes. During the primary in late April, Billings defeated Montgomery by 124 votes. was the election?s closest and pitted incumbent Leonard Elrod Masten against Lyle Marshall, who served as Chairman from 2001 to 2009. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1726electionphoto.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 60525 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jul 1 11:21:18 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 11:21:18 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Happy July 4 weekend to all 292 env-trinity subscribers Message-ID: <77A222EB-3338-4892-8BF8-1503BB3CF2D7@att.net> Env-Trinity subscribers: We just added another subscriber for a total of 292 subscribers to the env-trinity list serve! Thanks for being on the list. It serves a great purpose of disseminating information about the Trinity River and related matters. Have a great long weekend. I hope you have fun and spend it with loved ones. Sincerely, Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Jul 1 11:32:46 2011 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 11:32:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Happy July 4 weekend to all 292 env-trinity subscribers In-Reply-To: <77A222EB-3338-4892-8BF8-1503BB3CF2D7@att.net> References: <77A222EB-3338-4892-8BF8-1503BB3CF2D7@att.net> Message-ID: <0C06D170-FF0F-4BDA-B8B2-73047397AD5D@fishsniffer.com> Tom Thanks for keeping up the list, in the tradition of Byron Leydecker. This list has provided me with leads for a bunch of articles over the years. Have a great weekend! dan On Jul 1, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > Env-Trinity subscribers: > > We just added another subscriber for a total of 292 subscribers to > the env-trinity list serve! > > Thanks for being on the list. It serves a great purpose of > disseminating information about the Trinity River and related matters. > > Have a great long weekend. I hope you have fun and spend it with > loved ones. > > Sincerely, > > Tom Stokely > Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact > California Water Impact Network > V/FAX 530-926-9727 > Cell 530-524-0315 > tstokely at att.net > http://www.c-win.org > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity From tstokely at att.net Sat Jul 2 11:22:35 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 11:22:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Eureka Times Standard- Hoopa Tribe shuts down Two Rivers Tribune over controversial articles Message-ID: <2EDA2D11-9C0C-4571-994A-764EE15FF281@att.net> Hoopa Tribe shuts down Two Rivers Tribune over controversial articles; tribal newspaper staff rallying supporters for council meeting Donna Tam and Kaci Poor/The Times-Standard Posted: 07/02/2011 02:30:09 AM PDT Click photo to enlarge http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18397673 The Hoopa Valley Tribal Council chairman shut down the tribe's newspaper through a memo sent Friday afternoon, citing financial issues and disagreement over controversial articles. The Two Rivers Tribune, the tribe's newspaper for nearly 20 years, is a weekly newspaper distributed throughout Eastern Humboldt. According to the publication, it is the last Native-owned newspaper in California. According to a copy of the memo sent to the Times-Standard, Tribal Chairman Leonard Masten directed that the newspaper be closed immediately. He said the tribe was losing money by subsidizing the paper, but also pointed to recent controversial articles focused on marijuana issues and an interview with Bruce ?Jason? Stallings-Hunsucker, a man wanted for his alleged involvement in the shooting death of a well-respected Willow Creek resident. ?For the past three years, this department has cost the tribe over $189,000 from (Bureau of Indian Affairs) compact funds. This is not acceptable,? the memo reads. ?In addition to the financial troubles, the council and the chairman's office was very disappointed in the recent articles that were published in the paper. We have received numerous calls on insensitivity and lack of compassion for those families that have gone through such a tragedy. The chairman's office has taken a strong stance against drugs, and the paper has articles promoting drugs. This is not in the best interest of the tribe. I have discussed this issue (with) the Tribal Council and it has been decided that you will shut your department down until you developed a plan to correct your deficiencies.? A call to Masten late Friday was not immediately returned. Interim Managing Editor Allie Hostler said the memo, which is dated Thursday but was received by the paper around 1:30 p.m. Friday, came as a shock. She disputed the financial issues, citing her audit of the paper's financial records. Furthermore, she said, she's concerned about what this will mean for the paper's advertising contracts, which are active for another six months. ?It's just really disturbing that one man who didn't like our articles can basically take two decades worth of hard work on our part, and just close it,? Hostler said. The paper was receiving complaints and threats earlier in the week over the Hunsucker article. The paper's staff also wrote an editorial urging Hunsucker to turn himself in. Vice Chairman Byron Nelson Jr. said he ?was a little surprised? about Masten's decision to shut down the paper. He said Masten had discussed his concerns about the paper at Thursday's council meeting but that he hadn't said for sure that he would close it down. ?There were a couple stories in the past issue that were upsetting him,? Nelson said. ?It wasn't my understanding that he was going to shut it down.? Nelson was once the managing editor of the Two Rivers Tribune. He took over the then monthly newsletter, the Hoopa People, and turned it into a weekly. He said he hasn't personally had a problem with the paper, but is aware that some members of the community have expressed concerns to the chairman. ?The frustration is that there are stories that are more crucial than trying to be an investigative tool trying to take on controversial issues,? Nelson said. Nelson said he doesn't think that the paper will remain closed, but he does believe that the council will likely elect an editorial board to determine which stories are fit for print. ?It's not exactly like a paper on the outside,? Nelson said. ?It's a tribal paper, and there are a lot of politics involved.? Hostler said the newspaper's Internet access was disconnected shortly before the end of the business day, but she was able to get it reinstated. She plans to publish the paper on Tuesday and is trying to rally local supporters to attend a council meeting at 9 a.m. at the tribal office in Hoopa on Tuesday. ?I don't mean any disrespect to the Times-Standard or the North Coast Journal -- unfortunately they're not able to put the time and energy and effort into the community and the nitty-gritty stories out here. We're it,? Hostler said. ?At this point, I feel like we've proven ourselves. We've come a long way.? Donna Tam can be reached at 441-0532 or dtam at times-standard.com. Kaci Poor can be reached at 441-0514 orkpoor at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20110702__local_two_rivers_VIEWER.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8345 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jul 2 17:16:34 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 17:16:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] 2 Rivers Tribune- Chairman Shuts Down Newspaper Day Before New Council Sworn In Message-ID: <026B5610-1520-4888-867D-2FE0F8AE0AA9@att.net> Chairman Shuts Down Newspaper Day Before New Council Sworn In By TWO RIVERS TRIBUNE STAFF http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/07/chairman-shuts-down-newspaper-day-before-new-council-sworn-in/ The only newspaper in Eastern Humboldt County and the last Native owned newspaper in the State of California has been shut down ?effective immediately,? by Hoopa Valley Tribal Chairman, Leonard Masten Jr. ?In addition to financial troubles, the Council and the Chairman?s office was very disappointed in the recent articles that were published in the paper,? Masten said in a memo dated June 30, but delivered on July 1, perhaps not coincidentally the same day three new Tribal Council members were sworn into office. Masten claims in the memo that the Newspaper is running a $189,000 deficit over the course of the past three years, however Newspaper financial records paint a much different picture. Last fiscal year the Newspaper was in the black and is on course to profit again this fiscal year even during a world-wide economic collapse and a national recession when hundreds of newspapers shut their doors because they couldn?t meet their bottom line. The popular weekly sold out at several locations this week and averages over 1,700 website hits per day. ?It?s hard to watch our Newspaper doors being shut on us after we?ve worked tirelessly over the past two decades to make it what it is today,? Managing Editor Lorencita Lavine said after learning the news. Lavine is currently on maternity leave and has been since April. She was scheduled to return August 1, but her job has been eliminated along with the jobs of Interim Managing Editor, Allie Hostler; Advertising Sales Representative, Connie J. Davis; and Humboldt State University summer journalism intern, Scottie Lee Meyers. Several of the Two Rivers Tribune freelance contributors and Couriers are also left hanging. Masten referenced the ?Man on the Run? article as being one of the reasons the Tribe can longer subsidize the Newspaper. He also stated that ?The Chairman?s office has taken a strong stance against drugs and the paper has articles promoting drugs.? Both Lavine and Hostler cannot recall a time when the Newspaper has ever promoted drugs. In fact, the Newspaper has always been an active supporter of healthy communities and anti-drug campaigns. ?I believe the Chairman is referring to our marijuana themed issue of the Paper published on June 28,? Hostler said. ?If you read the stories, nothing in them promotes the use of marijuana, in fact, they promote the opposite; Connie?s research on Hemp?s used as a means to eradicate marijuana is quite informative as well as Scottie?s article about why the petition to repeal Title 34 failed. The Newspaper has plans to publish a themed edition each week throughout the summer with this Tuesday?s paper highlighting the garbage problem in our rural communities.? According the Society of Professional Journalists, journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information. Journalists should also support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant. And, among other things, journalists should be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable. ?We stand firm that we are doing our jobs in a manner that the Tribe and its membership can be proud of. Who else is going to serve as a watchdog to the powers that be if we don?t?,? Hostler said. ?It?s a struggle to squeeze relevant and important information from government officials as it is. Without a Newspaper you can expect what?s left of democracy in our river communities to die. We are being threatened with our jobs fordoing our jobs.? A memo dated January 19, 2011 from Masten states that the Two Rivers Tribune is required to offer free advertising to Tribal enterprises. Lavine asks how on one hand can we be expected to give away free advertising and on the other hand be scrutinized for not making adequate profit? The Two Rivers Tribune circulates 1,400 copies each week in the towns of Arcata, Willow Creek, Salyer, Burnt Ranch, Hoopa, Weitchpec, Orleans, Somes Bar and Happy Camp. There are also more than 300 faithful readers who receive the Two Rivers Tribune via paid subscriptions. A meeting will be held at the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council Chambers on Tuesday, July 5 at 9am. All members of the public are encouraged to attend to discuss this issue. Interim Managing Editor, Allie Hostler can be reached at (707)502-5027 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Jul 5 16:33:20 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 16:33:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Suction dredge status July 5, 2011 Message-ID: <4E139F40.8050102@tcrcd.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Suction dredge status July 5, 2011 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 11:09:16 -0700 From: Mark Stopher Reply-To: mstopher at dfg.ca.gov To: Mark Stopher Interested Parties Governor Brown vetoed specific parts of the State budget bill (i.e. SB 87), eliminating the provisions which would have prohibited the Department of Fish and Game from expending any funds for the development of suction dredge regulations. His message stated "I am deleting Provision 3, which would prohibit the Department of Fish and Game from using funds appropriated in this item for suction-dredge regulation, permitting, or other activities, except enforcement and litigation costs. This provision would prohibit the Department from completing a court-ordered Environmental Impact Report regarding the impacts of suction dredge mining on Coho salmon and other threatened or endangered species. While I am vetoing this language to ensure the Department is not in violation of the court order, I direct the Secretary of Resources to examine the program and associated policies before restarting the permit process." This action resolves some of the uncertainty about completion of the regulation writing process and compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which we had projected for completion in November of 2011. As of this moment, the Governor has not acted yet on a related budget trailer bill, i.e. AB 120. AB 120 includes the following language: ""(12) Existing law designates the issuance by the Department of Fish and Game of permits to operate vacuum or suction dredge equipment to be a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and suspends the issuance of permits, and mining pursuant to a permit, until the department has completed an environmental impact report for the project as ordered by the court in a specified court action. Existing law prohibits the use of any vacuum or suction dredge equipment in any river, stream, or lake, for instream mining purposes, until the Director of Fish and Game certifies to the Secretary of State that (a) the department has completed the environmental review of its existing vacuum or suction dredge equipment regulations as ordered by the court, (b) the department has transmitted for filing with the Secretary of State a certified copy of new regulations, as necessary, and (c) the new regulations are operative. This bill would modify that moratorium to prohibit the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment until June 30, 2016, or until the director?s certification to the secretary as described above, whichever is earlier. The bill would additionally require the director to certify that the new regulations fully mitigate all identified significant environmental impacts and that a fee structure is in place that will fully cover all costs to the department related to the administration of the program." The key elements are that the current moratorium is extended to June 30, 2016 unless, as before, the Department of Fish and Game complete its environmental review under CEQA, adopts new regulations and those regulations take effect. It adds two new requirements. First, all significant impacts must be fully mitigated. This appears to be a different standard for approval than we were previously working toward, however, the term "fully mitigate" is not defined in CEQA or the Fish and Game Code. And a new fee structure must be in place. This latter requirement will require legislation. Each new requirement has the potential to affect the substance of the outcome and timing of these efforts. Currently, we continue to work on the regulations and Final SEIR. Once the outcome of AB 120 is known we will reconsider how this effort will proceed. Mark Stopher Environmental Program Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 voice 530.225.2275 fax 530.225.2391 cell 530.945.1344 mstopher at dfg.ca.gov -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CA Suction Dredge EIR" group. To post to this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ca-suction-dredge-eir?hl=en. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Jul 5 16:33:20 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 16:33:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Suction dredge status July 5, 2011 Message-ID: <4E139F40.8050102@tcrcd.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Suction dredge status July 5, 2011 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 11:09:16 -0700 From: Mark Stopher Reply-To: mstopher at dfg.ca.gov To: Mark Stopher Interested Parties Governor Brown vetoed specific parts of the State budget bill (i.e. SB 87), eliminating the provisions which would have prohibited the Department of Fish and Game from expending any funds for the development of suction dredge regulations. His message stated "I am deleting Provision 3, which would prohibit the Department of Fish and Game from using funds appropriated in this item for suction-dredge regulation, permitting, or other activities, except enforcement and litigation costs. This provision would prohibit the Department from completing a court-ordered Environmental Impact Report regarding the impacts of suction dredge mining on Coho salmon and other threatened or endangered species. While I am vetoing this language to ensure the Department is not in violation of the court order, I direct the Secretary of Resources to examine the program and associated policies before restarting the permit process." This action resolves some of the uncertainty about completion of the regulation writing process and compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which we had projected for completion in November of 2011. As of this moment, the Governor has not acted yet on a related budget trailer bill, i.e. AB 120. AB 120 includes the following language: ""(12) Existing law designates the issuance by the Department of Fish and Game of permits to operate vacuum or suction dredge equipment to be a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and suspends the issuance of permits, and mining pursuant to a permit, until the department has completed an environmental impact report for the project as ordered by the court in a specified court action. Existing law prohibits the use of any vacuum or suction dredge equipment in any river, stream, or lake, for instream mining purposes, until the Director of Fish and Game certifies to the Secretary of State that (a) the department has completed the environmental review of its existing vacuum or suction dredge equipment regulations as ordered by the court, (b) the department has transmitted for filing with the Secretary of State a certified copy of new regulations, as necessary, and (c) the new regulations are operative. This bill would modify that moratorium to prohibit the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment until June 30, 2016, or until the director?s certification to the secretary as described above, whichever is earlier. The bill would additionally require the director to certify that the new regulations fully mitigate all identified significant environmental impacts and that a fee structure is in place that will fully cover all costs to the department related to the administration of the program." The key elements are that the current moratorium is extended to June 30, 2016 unless, as before, the Department of Fish and Game complete its environmental review under CEQA, adopts new regulations and those regulations take effect. It adds two new requirements. First, all significant impacts must be fully mitigated. This appears to be a different standard for approval than we were previously working toward, however, the term "fully mitigate" is not defined in CEQA or the Fish and Game Code. And a new fee structure must be in place. This latter requirement will require legislation. Each new requirement has the potential to affect the substance of the outcome and timing of these efforts. Currently, we continue to work on the regulations and Final SEIR. Once the outcome of AB 120 is known we will reconsider how this effort will proceed. Mark Stopher Environmental Program Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 voice 530.225.2275 fax 530.225.2391 cell 530.945.1344 mstopher at dfg.ca.gov -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CA Suction Dredge EIR" group. To post to this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ca-suction-dredge-eir?hl=en. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 6 21:20:41 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 21:20:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher- Closed-door meetings to fund construction of peripheral canal exposed! References: <19B5C9C8-1A0E-43A0-9F21-64D5E920B7FD@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: From: Dan Bacher Date: July 6, 2011 7:09:13 PM PDT Subject: Closed-door meetings to fund construction of peripheral canal exposed! http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/07/06/3852 As recently as June, Jerry Meral, who has been given charge by the Brown Administration to lead the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, assured public participants that all processes underway through the BDCP were "open and transparent." peripheral_canal_090217-s... Closed-door meetings to fund construction of peripheral canal exposed! by Dan Bacher Representatives of the Metropolitan Water District, State Water Contractors Association and San Luis Delta-Mendota Water Authority are holding closed-door meetings with Brown and Obama administration officials to create a finance plan for construction of the peripheral canal or tunnel, Restore the Delta revealed today. This canal/tunnel, a key component of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), will divert Sacramento River water away from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and southern California water agencies. Schwarzenegger relentlessly campaigned for the canal through the BDCP and Delta Vision processes while he was Governor - and the Brown and Obama administrations have decided to continue Schwarzenegger's abysmal environmental legacy. In a public meeting of the BDCP in Sacramento on April 25, John Laird, Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, committed the agency to making the BDCP more inclusive of all of the stakeholders - and acknowledged the problems with the Schwarzenegger administration's requirement that participants sign an agreement agreeing to support the construction of the peripheral canal/tunnel. "I believe that we cannot move forward without listening to the stakeholders around the state," said Laird. "The status quo on the Delta is unsustainable. There is no one from any groups that believes in the status quo." As recently as June, Jerry Meral, who has been given charge by the Brown Administration to lead the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, assured public participants that all processes underway through the BDCP were "open and transparent," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta. However, video from the June 28, 2011 Metropolitan Water District Special Committee on the Bay Delta confirms that water contractors, including Metropolitan Water District's General Manager Roger Patterson, are already working with Department of Water Resources and Bureau of Reclamation officials to create the finance plan for new conveyance, said Barrigan-Parrilla. The meeting can be heard athttp://mwdh2o.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=12&clip_id=1630 , minute 36. Barrigan-Parrilla points out, "The BDCP website describes work on project financing as not beginning until the fall of 2011 after determinations are made regarding benefits of new water deliveries for State and Federal Water Contractors. However, as we have always suspected, those who want to take additional water away from Northern California and the Delta are crafting a finance plan without California tax payer and/or rate payer input." "How much more are urban water users in San Diego and Los Angeles willing to pay for water in order to finance this project?" asks California Delta Chambers Executive Director Bill Wells. "Can Central Valley farmers afford to farm if the price of water triples and quadruples to pay for a canal? And how much of the financial burden will be shifted to tax payers to cover the astronomical costs for environmental mitigation to the Delta?" Barrigan-Parrilla maintains that Californians are being "hit very hard with cutbacks in education and essential services due to budget cuts." Therefore, Californians should have a say when it comes to large expenditures like building a canal or tunnel through the Delta - even if they will be asked only to finance a part of the project. "The conflict between the Brown Administration's assertion that the Bay Delta Conservation plan is an open and transparent process and the real ongoing practice of dealing with the most important aspects of the BDCP in private is alarming," she states. Barrigan-Parrilla asks, "Shouldn't these types of meetings on financing the Bay Delta Conservation Plan be noticed and open to the public? Why the secrecy if there is nothing to hide?" As an independent investigative journalist who has uncovered conflicts of interest and violations of numerous laws under Schwarzenegger's BDCP, Delta Vision and Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative fiascos, I concur with Barrigan-Parrilla. If the water contractors indeed have nothing to hide, they should abide by Bagley-Keene Open Meetings Act, the Brown Act and other state laws and open all of their meetings to the public. A broad coalition of recreational and commercial fishing groups, Indian Tribes, grassroots environmental organizations, family farmers, environmental justice advocates and Delta residents oppose the construction of the peripheral canal - "Arnold's Big Ditch" - because it would likely lead to the extinction of Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations. The BDCP process to build a peripheral canal is a parallel process to the MLPA Initiative to create a network of controversial "marine protected areas" off the California coast. The promoters of both processes claim that they are "open and transparent" - when they are anything but. The Brown and Obama administrations are going ahead with Arnold Schwarzenegger's plans to build a peripheral canal/tunnel by meeting with water exporters in closed-door meetings. Meanwhile, the Brown administration continues to forge ahead with the MLPA Initiative, in spite of the violations of state, federal and international laws that have occurred under the process, funded privately by the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund Foundation. George Osborn, spokesman for a coalition of recreational fishing organizations, presented a 25 page document documenting illegal private, non-public meetings of Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) officials to the California Fish and Game Commission during its meeting on February 2 in Sacramento. United Anglers of Southern California, the Coastside Fishing Club and Bob Fletcher, members of the Partnership for Sustainable Oceans (PSO), filed suit in San Diego Superior Court in late January, seeking to overturn South Coast and North Central Coast MLPA closures, alleging violations of the State Administrative Procedure Act. During his brief public testimony, Osborn exposed the corruption and violations of law by the MLPA?s Blue Ribbon Task Force (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7_04BC1acA). ?After reviewing the documents turned over to us, which previously the BRTF had improperly withheld from the public, we now have evidence, indicating that the public meetings of the BRTF have been an elaborately staged Kabuki performance, choreographed and rehearsed down to the last detail, even to the crafting of motions, in scheduled private meetings held before the so-called public meetings of the BRTF,? said Osborn. ?Clearly, this has not been the most open and transparent process, as it has so often been described.? In both the case of the BDCP and the MLPA, we are definitely seeing a classic case of, "Meet the new boss - same as the old boss," as The Who sang many years ago. As these two controversial processes proceed, the carnage continues at the state and federal water export pumps on the Delta. An alarming 8,538,859 Sacramento splittail and 35,202 Central Valley chinook salmon were "salvaged" in the Delta pumping facilities from January 1, 2011 to June 26, 2011. The number of splittail, a native minnow, salvaged to date is greater than in any previous years since the federal and state governments started keeping records on splittail in 1993. You can see the BDCP website description of financing at: http://baydeltaconservationplan.com/BDCPPlanningProcess/WorkingGroups/WorkingGroup-Financing.aspx. For more information, contact: Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Phone: 209-479-2053, Restore the Delta, 10100 Trinity Pkwy, Suite 120, Stockton, CA, 95219, web: www.restorethedelta.org, email: Barbara [at] Restorethedelta.org Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: peripheral_canal_090217-small.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 34967 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 6 21:29:41 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 21:29:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Lloyd Carter- Westlands Drainage Delay No. 389 (Chronicles of the Hydraulic Brotherhood) Message-ID: The Trinity River is a source of water for Westlands. -Tom Stokely Westlands Drainage Delay No. 389 By Lloyd Carter Created 07/04/2011 - 11:26 http://www.lloydgcarter.com/content/110704496_westlands-drainage-delay-no-389 Nearly 60 years ago the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation began working on a drainage system for the problem-plagued high selenium soils of the western San Joaquin Valley. On Thursday (June 30), the Bureau asked if U.S. District Court Judge Oliver Wanger would grant a request for another four months to allow Reclamation to consider a proposal by the mammoth Westlands Water District to change the starting point of construction of the latest version of a drainage system. Following an hour-long hearing, Wanger granted the Westlands? motion over the protests of the older federal irrigation districts which are downslope, and to the north, of the Westlands, which is located in western Fresno and Kings counties. Attorneys for the Central California Irrigation District, which stretches from near Mendota to Crows Landing in Stanislaus County, and the adjacent Firebaugh Canal Water District argued that to grant the Westlands request would force the Bureau to deviate from a court scheduling order and the Bureau?s own 2007 plan (called a Record of Decision or ROD) which called for installation of a drainage system at the north end of the Westlands first. To say that progress on the Westlands drainage problem has been glacial in pace would be incorrect because glaciers now are melting as fast as an Anthony Weiner underwear photo moves around the Twitter universe. So let?s just say progress, if that is what it actually is, is made at a snail?s pace and is measured in decades. To refresh your memories, in 1955 the Bureau unveiled a plan for a $7 million earthen canal to carry Westlands? salt-loaded drainwater to the eastern edge of the Delta. The San Luis Unit of the federal Central Valley Project was approved by Congress in 1960 and by then a much more expensive cement-lined drain canal to the Delta was envisioned. Downslope farming interests and Delta/Bay area farming interests opposed completion of a drain to the Delta and by the mid-1970s construction of the San Luis Drain was halted in a wetlands area north of Los Banos in Merced County and evaporation ponds were built to hold the water. The end of the line for the drainwater was the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge. In the early 1980s, Reclamation officials learned the drainwater contained the trace element selenium. It had entered the Kesterson food chain, killing all but one fish species and triggering grotesque deformities in bird embryos. There was a huge public outcry and in 1985, the Reagan Administration announced the Kesterson ponds would be closed. Famed Reclamation Commission Floyd Dominy, who headed the dam-building agency from 1959 to 1969, later said he never should have commenced water deliveries to Westlands before resolving the drainage problem. ?I made a terrible mistake by going ahead with Westlands at the time we did," he said. In 1998 Westlands sued the federal government contending the 1960 Congresssional act and its contracts with Reclamation required the federal government to build a drain. Judge Wanger agreed but reaffirmed Westlands would have to pay for a drainage system. By the late 1990s estimates of a bird-safe drainage disposal system was estimated at $1 to $3 billion for 600 Westlands growers. In 2000, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed Wanger?s conclusion that a drainage system had to be built but said Reclamation did not necessarily have to build the drain canal to the Delta as authorized in the 1960 San Luis Act. Instead, the Ninth Circuit said, Reclamation could experiment with other methods of treating the drainage, including reverse osmosis, recycling, and using the tainted drainwater to grow salt-tolerant crops. The Ninth Circuit ruling stated: ?[W]e agree with the district court that the Department of Interior must act to provide drainage service. The Bureau of Reclamation has studied the problem for over two decades. In the interim, lands within Westlands are subject to irreparable injury caused by agency action unlawfully withheld. ? Now the time has come for the Department of Interior and the Bureau of Reclamation to bring the past two decades of studies, and the 50 million dollars expended pursuing an ?in valley? drainage solution, to bear in meeting its duty to provide drainage under the San Luis Act.? The court ruling said the government must ?act promptly? and ?without delay? to find a solution. That was 11 years ago. Like I said, things move slowly in the Drainage World. In 2007, the Bureau Record of Decision (ROD) considered several different solutions. One solution, which could cost $2.6 billion, called for retiring 140,894 salted up acres of Westlands acreage and another 14,467 acres in the federal water districts north of Westlands, an area known as the Grasslands. Drainage facilities would be built in both the Westlands and the Grasslands area. Economic losses of this proposal were estimated at $10.2 million a year. A second option, bitterly opposed by Westlands, called for retiring all 253,894 selenium-tainted acres in Westlands and build drainage and treatment facilities for 66,533 acres of impaired land in the Grasslands area. The economic gain would be $3.6 million a year. Not surprisingly, the Bureau, prodded by Westlands and its Congressional allies, chose the money-losing option which conflicted with federal rules requiring agencies to select options with the greatest overall benefit. To overcome this little problem, Department of Interior official Bennett Raley, during the George W. Bush Administration, issued a special exemption. However, the incoming Obama Administration rejected that scheme and the Bureau tried yet again, coming up with the latest version that, until Thursday?s hearing before Wanger, called for drainage facilities to be built first in the northern area of the Westlands. Westlands then asked Wanger to permit Reclamation to change the schedule to allow drainage facilities to first be built in the central area of Westlands. The reason? The northern area only has 18,500 acres under cultivation and the central area has approximately 55,600 acres in production. Drainage facilities in the central area would bring immediate relief to two-and-a-half times the acreage of the northern area. That would be good for Westlands but not necessarily for farmers down the hill. But Paul Minasian, attorney for the federal districts to the north of Westlands argued in his written opposition, that the Bureau of Reclamation had committed to eliminating drainage discharges ?to the San Joaquin River as soon as practicable? and switching the starting point for the drainage facilities? construction would further degrade his districts? farmlands and allow drainage degradation of the lower river to continue and. Minasian also argued that ?[w]hether the lands within the northern subunit of Westlands are currently irrigated or were irrigated in the past and have been retired, the subsurface aquifers are saturated and poor quality water and pressure are moving downslope in the shallow aquifers and contributing to the drainage loads in the San Joaquin River.? Minasian added ?the Northerly area downslope of portions of the northern subunit of Westlands receives this subsurface water from higher elevation lands within the northern subunit of Westlands. These combined drainage waters pass through the Grassland Bypass system into the San Joaquin River. Abandoning the drainage efforts in the northern subunit of Westlands will eviscerate the Bureau?s stated goal to eliminate discharges to the San Joaquin River as soon as practicable.? Minasian pointed out the Bureau?s regional director had stated ?the principle reason we chose to initiate construction in the northern subunit of Westlands is because our existing feasibility design provides a fully-functional drainage system within the cost ceiling limitations, which enables us to proceed with the final design and construction with minor modifications to the existing feasibility design. However, the existing feasibility design for a fully functional drain system in another subunit of Westlands covers a much larger service area, includes significantly more facilities and exceeds the existing cost ceiling limitations.? (Emphasis added.) However, Wanger turned a deaf ear to these arguments. In the past Westlands officials have denied their degraded shallow groundwater is migrating downslope to the San Joaquin River. Their attorney denied it again at the Thursday hearing. Wanger expressed concern that the Bureau might lack funding to switch the starting point for drainage facilities to an area two-and-a-half time bigger than the northern area. An Interior Department attorney said the 120-day delay would allow Bureau officials to assess the feasibility of the Westlands proposal to change starting points and determine whether Congressional appropriations were adequate. The 2000 Ninth Circuit ruling had said the district court should not interfere with Reclamation?s discretionary authority to implement a drainage solution in the manner it chooses. Still undecided after all these years is how Westlands? 600 growers will pay for a drainage system that may cost up to $2 billion. Westlands has been negotiating a repayment contract with Bureau officials in Sacramento with virtually no media coverage. Westlands still owes an estimated $470 million for the irrigation water delivery facilities built back in the 1960s and purportedly wants a considerable portion, if not all, of that debt forgiven before agreeing to a drainage repayment contract. Have I mentioned that the latest drainage ?fix?, wherever they start, includes a never before tried demonstration water treatment plant to detoxify the drainage. And the latest ?solution? also includes evaporation ponds for the nastiest drainwater. Evaporation ponds? Aren?t those what killed the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge? Are we in some kind of time warp on this drainage debacle where Reclamation keeps circling back to the same failed solutions? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 6 22:24:49 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 22:24:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Lloyd Carter- Nice payday for top Westlands officials References: <000001cc3c39$356a1990$a03e4cb0$@net> Message-ID: <1957CA6A-D7D6-4935-A1AF-7C7FAC5BE1B7@att.net> http://www.lloydgcarter.com/content/110706500_nice-payday-top-westlands-officials Westlands Bureaucracy It is said that bureaucracy has two rules: (1) survive, and (2) expand. Certainly, the phenomena of expanding bureaucracy extends beyond federal and state agencies. It reaches down to the humblest of special districts in California, including water districts, which operate as their own mini-municipalities. The biggest federal irrigation water district in the nation is a good example. Westlands Water District?s 600 growers may have faced hard times in the recent drought but a survey of salaries for the district?s employees, provided by State Controller?s John Chiang?s office, show they are among the best paid irrigation district officials in California. Westlands General Manager Thomas Birmingham makes $350,004 a year, plus benefits, expenses and a state pension program funded by CalPERS. For comparison purposes, the governor of California and its 37 million people makes $212,179. The Controller?s figures are for the calendar year 2009, the latest numbers available. Birmingham is an attorney and has acted as attorney for the district on occasion but the Westlands website currently lists the current General Counsel as Craig Manson, who was not on the 2009 list of employees. Manson?s salary, if he is salaried, is not available. Westlands Assistant General Manager Dave Ciapponi makes an annual salary of $216, 674. Chief Deputy General Manager Jason Peltier, a former lobbyist for the Central Valley Project contractors and an Interior Department water official during the Bush Administration, makes $185,004 a year. Susan Ramos, a former U.S. Bureau of Reclamation official who is now Westlands? Deputy General Manager for Resources, makes $165,000 a year. James Snow, Deputy General Manager for Water Policy, makes $156,000 a year. Deputy General Manager for Resources Tom Glover makes $190,000 a year. The total for the salaries of these top six officials is $1,262,682, plus expenses, perks (cell phones, cars, etc.) and benefits. The big salaries don?t stop at the top administrators. Westlands has a Deputy General for Public Affairs who makes a remarkable $175,000 a year. Until recently, the position was held by a member of a prominent Westlands farming family. The District?s Director of Finance makes $138,000 a year. The Westlands supervisor of customer accounting makes $98,708. The Supervisor of Resources (whatever that is) makes $95,008. There is even a $40,000 a year salary for a caretaker at the Northern California fishing resort, Bollibokka, on the McCloud River, which Westlands acquired in early 2007 for over $30 million. Westlands bought the trophy trout resort in case the Bureau of Reclamation ever raises Shasta Dam, which would flood out the fishing resort. Because Westlands is a public agency it must file the salaries of its employees with the Controller?s Office. Westlands has a Supervisor of Electrical Maintenance, a senior electrician, five electricians, and two electrician apprentices. The salary for these nine employees comes to nearly half a million dollars, excluding benefits. Why the district needs nine electricians is not immediately clear. Westlands, in 2009, had 112 employees (and nine openings), which means there is one employee for every five growers in the district, which started out in 1952 with only a handful of employees. If there are salaries or income for the Westlands Board of Directors they were not listed at the Controller?s website. Total annual compensation for the 112 Westlands employees in 2009, at the height of the drought, reached over $6 million. Farmers may have suffered but District employees did not. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 7 07:54:53 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 07:54:53 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Wheel Gulch project ramping up this week Message-ID: <11464CF9-407F-44EC-8F05-80B31E6E5925@att.net> Wheel Gulch project ramping up this week http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-07-06/News/Wheel_Gulch_project_ramping_up_this_week.html This year?s Trinity River Restoration Program mechanical channel rehabilitation project is ramping up this week at the Wheel Gulch site, about three miles downstream of Junction City. Initial work on the Wheel Gulch Channel Rehabilitation Project will include surveying and construction staking of the project boundaries. Heavy equipment is slated to move in this week with clearing and grubbing to start shortly thereafter. TRRP can only work in the river during the July 15 to Sept. 15 in-river work period. While in-river construction will be completed by Sept. 15, floodplain and upslope work will continue until construction is done in December. The site is primarily on private lands and is closed to public access. An open house to discuss Wheel Gulch work and to present preliminary TRRP designs for future river restoration is scheduled for 6 p.m. July 27 at the North Fork Grange Hall on Dutch Creek Road in Junction City. Boaters are cautioned to be aware that construction equipment may be working in the river between July 15 and Sept. 15. TRRP also advises the public to be careful of heavy equipment along Highway 299 in proximity of the project. The project is designed to increase shallow lowvelocity areas for salmonid fry rearing and to increase and maintain fish habitat complexity in the Trinity River. This project is being implemented under direction of the TRRP in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management, California Department of Water Resources, and the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. If you have any questions concerning this project, public meetings, or future TRRP restoration plans, call TRRP at 623-1800 or stop by the office next to Tops Super Foods in Weaverville. For more information about the TRRP rehabilitation projects visit www.trrp net. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 7 10:34:39 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 10:34:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] New NRDC Film Featuring Fishermen and Farmers Calling for Delta Protections References: <147211FC7164EE4AAEE8E37AA894B598039537E3@sfmail4.nrdc.org> Message-ID: <3A712585-04F1-40D0-8FB2-1BD09F497DE9@att.net> From: "Nelson, Barry" Date: July 7, 2011 9:40:46 AM PDT To: Subject: New NRDC Film Featuring Fishermen and Farmers Calling for Delta Protections Friends ? Today, NRDC released a new short film featuring fishermen and Delta farmers speaking up in support of strong Delta protections. You can access this video in Doug?s new blog post - http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dobegi/why_we_work_to_protect_califor.html Please take a moment to forward this film widely, to friends, family, colleagues, members etc. The more people hear directly from the fishermen and Delta farmers who benefit from Delta protections, the more effective we will be in dispelling the ?fish vs. people? myth. We?re sending out NRDC?s action alert today with a link to this film. Please feel free to do so as well, as you send out alerts. Barry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TSTOKELY at ATT.NET Fri Jul 8 08:04:18 2011 From: TSTOKELY at ATT.NET (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 08:04:18 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard- Two Rivers Tribune controversy sparks First Amendment debate Message-ID: <28CA569C-7C57-470C-A6FD-A3A243537743@ATT.NET> Two Rivers Tribune controversy sparks First Amendment debate; Editor: Did the council want a newsletter or did it want a newspaper? Kaci Poor/The Times-Standard Posted: 07/06/2011 02:30:09 AM PDT http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18417037 Click photo to enlarge Allie Hostler, interim manager of the Two Rivers Tribune, stood before the Hoopa Valley Tribal council Tuesday morning and posed a question: Did the council want a newsletter or did it want a newspaper? Hostler's question is central to a debate that came to a head Friday afternoon when Tribal Chairman Leonard Masten sent a memo to Hostler informing her that the tribe's newspaper was to be shut down immediately. The memo cited financial issues and disagreement over controversial articles. Masten called for the staff of the Two Rivers Tribune to create a plan outlining how they would correct the newspapers deficiencies at Tuesday's meeting. According to a copy of the memo sent to the Times-Standard, Masten said the tribe was losing money by subsidizing the paper, but also pointed to recent controversial articles focused on marijuana issues and an interview with Bruce ?Jason? Stallings-Hunsucker, a man wanted for his alleged involvement in the shooting death of a well-respected Willow Creek resident. At the meeting -- a first for some members of the council who were sworn in Friday -- tribal members stepped forward to voice their support for the weekly newspaper. ?The tribal chambers were packed to standing room only. Some people were even out in the lobby,? said former Councilwoman Marcelene Norton, who termed out Thursday after serving for two years. Norton said that while some of the newspaper's articles had sparked controversy over the years, that wasn't a bad thing. ?I think the outcry of supporters that I saw today -- even those opposed to some of the controversial issues -- is a healthy indication of how the community feels about the newspaper,? Norton said. Norton said she spoke before the council to remind them that Masten's decision to terminate the paper was not made with the consensus of the council. According to Norton, the council had a discussion concerning the Two Rivers Tribune at a special meeting held last Wednesday but that no conclusive decision was made to close the newspaper, which has been in operation for nearly 20 years. Vice Chairman Byron Nelson Jr., one of the members of the council who expressed concerns about the paper at Wednesday's meeting, said that he did not expect Masten to close it. Nelson did, however, express frustration with the staff of the Two Rivers Tribune after Tuesday's meeting. ?I had conveyed to the interim managing editor, Allie, before that this didn't need to become a cause on their part when it could be worked out administratively,? Nelson said, referring to media attention the newspaper received over the weekend and a Facebook page staff members created. ?No other department can do that if they are disciplined -- go to the media and try to gain support,? Nelson said. ?Right now, if they want to make a cause out of it, that paper can stop and never come back into existence. I told them not to make threats.? Nelson believes that the manager of the paper needs to come forth and work with the council. ?There needs to be compromises on both sides,? Nelson said. According to Nelson, the purpose of Tuesday's meeting was to get the paper back online so ?that it could work through whatever the freedom of the press and First Amendment issues were.? For Hostler -- who said that First Amendment rights in the tribe are a gray area -- it's been a struggle and a challenge to work within the tribal community as a journalist. ?I learned over the years how important free speech really is to a democracy,? Hostler said. ?I feel robbed as a tribal member that my tribal government doesn't recognize those rights. It's a sad day when they can censor the paper.? Kevin R. Kemper -- a research fellow for the Native American Journalists Association and an assistant journalism professor at the University of Arizona -- agreed. He said this is an issue that tribes have been struggling with for years. ?It looks to me like what the tribe did is illegal,? said Kemper, who has a law degree but is not a practicing attorney. ?The tribal journalists have press rights, but even further, the tribe itself has a right to have a newspaper,? Kemper said. ?Journalism has to be protected for native people, whether it is good or bad. Shutting down the newspaper is, I believe, illegal and grossly inappropriate.? Hostler isn't sure what answer the council will give to her question. She doesn't even know if the paper's staff will be getting a paycheck. But, Hostler said she does know one thing -- the council needs to hurry up and decide. ?I urge the Tribal Council to move quickly,? Hostler said. ?Newspapers come out weekly. Newsletters come out whenever you want them to.? BOX: At a glance: Hoopa Valley Tribe bylaw Section 1. The Hoopa Valley Tribe, in exercising its powers of self-government, shall not: a. Make or enforce any law prohibition the free exercise of religion, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble and to petition for a redress of grievances; Source: Hoopa Valley Tribe Constitutional Bylaws -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20110706__local_hoopa_VIEWER.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7875 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Daryl_Van_Dyke at fws.gov Fri Jul 8 14:36:10 2011 From: Daryl_Van_Dyke at fws.gov (Daryl_Van_Dyke at fws.gov) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 15:36:10 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Daryl Van Dyke is out of the office. Message-ID: I will be out of the office starting 07/08/2011 and will not return until 07/16/2011. I will respond to your message when I return. I will be in San Diego for the 2011 ESRI UC. If you are down there, please feel free to come by my presentation on Wed, 7/13 @ 8:30 AM on LiDAR Applications. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 13 10:26:06 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:26:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fresno Bee- Ag prospers, but Valley's crop of social ills persists References: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F705CA888D06@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> Message-ID: Ag prospers, but Valley's crop of social ills persists http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/07/09/2459224/ag-prospers-but-valleys-crop-of.html Posted at 09:56 PM on Saturday, Jul. 09, 2011 The word is out: Farming is one of the most lucrative enterprises in the world. Wall Street is advising clients to buy farmland. Financial blogs tell of hedge-fund managers cashing in their fortunes to become farmers. Commodity prices are soaring as tariffs fall and emerging markets snap up food and fiber. One example: India has lowered its tariff on pistachios from 30% to 10%, creating even more consumer demand. Two years ago, famed investor Jim Rogers predicted an agricultural bonanza based on international food shortages lasting 20 to 30 years. "Farmers are going to have the Lamborghinis, not the brokers on Wall Street," Rogers said. Few people believed Rogers then, but they believe him now. Midwest corn growers feverishly are buying land and no longer need bank loans for fertilizer and fuel. They pay cash instead. Here in the fertile San Joaquin Valley, prices for pistachios, almonds, walnuts, grapes and cotton are generating big profits. Good for the farmers. It's nice to see someone doing well -- especially in the midst of a recession that has no end in sight. But you have to wonder whether agriculture's meteoric comeback finally will prompt voters to think twice about hokum peddled by the Valley's congressional delegation. For years, we've been told that the Valley would prosper if only the farmers finally got their water and the "radical environmentalists" let them grow their crops. Now we're seeing that our representatives don't know squat about economics and charting a course out of chronic double-digit unemployment. The farmers have their water and record profits. But the Central Valley remains one of the nation's most long-suffering areas. How many times have we been told that jobs would return if farming could only be freed from shackles imposed by know-nothing environmentalists, judges and government bureaucracies? I bet that Rep. Devin Nunes has uttered some version of this myth a thousand times during his nine years in office. Reps. Jim Costa, Dennis Cardoza and Jeff Denham don't deserve a pass, either. All have catered almost exclusively to agriculture throughout their political careers. So I ask all of them: Where are the jobs? Why isn't the entire Valley -- the most productive farm area in the world -- not sharing in the handsome bounty reaped by corporate and large family farms? The answer is, farming has changed dramatically. It is more technological. There is less need for labor. Successful operators get bigger yields per acre. Here's something else: Much of the profit flows to corporate headquarters and investors outside of the Valley. But the big farm operations and their political allies don't talk much about these facts. Instead, they continue to peddle the lie that the rise and fall of the Valley economy rests entirely on ag's shoulders. And when push comes to shove, they have no qualms about using the poor and unemployed as stage props in their political theater. It's right for Nunes and others in Congress -- as well as the Valley's state representatives -- to fight for agriculture. But these officials have an obligation to represent the Valley's other citizens, too, and they're doing a miserable job. Look at the unemployment numbers, poverty, blight and lack of access to decent medical care. This is what farming wrought. Farming isn't going to cure our economy -- regardless of how high the profits soar. THE COLUMNIST CAN BE REACHED AT BMCEWEN at FRESNOBEE.COM OR (559) 441-6632. LISTEN TO HIS TALK SHOW DAILY AT NOON ON KYNO (AM 940). FOLLOW HIM ON TWITTER AT @FRESNOMAC. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 13 10:32:34 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:32:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Siskiyou_Daily_News-_Report_calls_?= =?windows-1252?q?dam_proposal_=91an_experiment=92?= Message-ID: By Jamie Gentner Siskiyou Daily News Posted Jul 11, 2011 @ 10:27 AM http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1223065266/Report-calls-dam-proposal-an-experiment Yreka, Calif. ? At its Tuesday meeting, the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors? attention was drawn to a Los Angeles Times article that discussed an expert panel?s evaluation of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) and the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA). According to a summary of the agreement, the KHSA calls for studies of the possible environmental impacts and potential outcomes that would accompany the removal of four dams ? J.C. Boyle, Copco 1, Copco 2 and Iron Gate ? along the Klamath River. The KBRA, according to its summary, aims to propose fishery restoration programs, establish reliable water and power supplies, and contribute to public welfare and the sustainability of Klamath Basin communities. The L.A. Times article summarizes a June 13 report by the Klamath River Expert Panel titled ?Scientific Assessment of Two Dam Removal Alternatives on Chinook Salmon.? It states the panel?s conclusion is that the proposal ?amounts to an experiment with no guarantee of success.? While the agreements are apparently a ?major step forward? in boosting salmon population, the project would have to tackle ?vexing problems,? including poor water quality and fish disease, the Times article states. According to the panel?s report, the agreements don?t adequately address those issues. The agreements would possibly leave biologists trucking fish around a stretch of water with low oxygen levels, the panel finds. They could also require converting about 40 percent of irrigated farmland in the Upper Klamath Lake watershed to wetlands, panelist Wim Kimmerer told the Times. ?That?s a major industrial sector for Siskiyou County,? District 5 Supervisor Marcia Armstrong said Tuesday. ?That?s more than one-third of our agriculture. It would take those guys out.? Kimmerer further told the Times, ?It doesn?t seem to me like they?ve thought about the big picture very much.? The report notes that the agreements do not seem to express ?a feasible level of effort.? The Times article also quotes Dennis Lynch, program manager for the studies, who visited Siskiyou County to discuss the agreements in February. He told the Times that while a team of scientists gathering information about the effects of dam removal agrees water quality problems will take decades to fix, the scientists are optimistic about being able to resolve them. ?I think they were pretty conservative in their analysis,? Lynch said of the panel?s report. When County Counsel Thomas Guarino referred to that portion of the article,?Armstrong laughed. ?It was interesting to read Dennis Lynch?s comment about how they felt the selected panel of experts was too conservative,? she said. ?It was not, ?We have lousy science.?? The article also makes mention of the nearly $1 billion price tag the agreements carry. In an update the previous week, Guarino offered details from a meeting of the Klamath Basin Coordinating Council (KBCC), a group created under the KBRA. He said the KBCC is seeking to restructure the budget for the KBRA, revising estimates from about $1.2 billion to $798.5 million. It appears the federal government is moving forward with aspects of the KBRA even before receiving secretarial approval, he said, despite the fact that it is ?unclear how reducing funding in the KBRA is going to address the concerns that there is insufficient funding as it is,? he says in a memo. That may not be a good idea, according to Steve Pedery of Oregon Wild, who told the Times, ?If federal taxpayers are going to be asked to spend this kind of money, it better be for a program that works.? Overall, Guarino told the board, the Times story reiterates points Siskiyou County officials have tried to get across for a while. ?This points out that they have to have credibility in the underlying effort, and even their own experts are saying these agreements aren?t going to do what you think they?re going to do,? he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 13 10:25:14 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:25:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher- Carnage at the Delta death pumps continues unabated Message-ID: Carnage at the Delta death pumps continues unabated http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/07/12/18684532.php by Dan Bacher Tuesday Jul 12th, 2011 2:49 PM "Fish losses at export facilities represent a staggering embezzlement of public trust resources belonging to all Californians," concluded Bill Jennings, chairman/executive director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). Aerial photo of the Tracy Fish Collection Facility (TFCF) in the South Delta courtesy of the Bureau of Reclamation. aerial-view-of-tfcf.jpg Carnage at the Delta death pumps continues unabated by Dan Bacher The horrific counts of Sacramento splittail, Central Valley chinook salmon and other fish species ?consumed? by the "predator" water export pumping facilities on the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta continue unabated, according to Bill Jennings, chairman/executive director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. A total of 8,830,515 splittail, 35,435 chinook salmon, 246,833 striped bass, 33,822 largemouth bass, 60,822 bluegill, 50,634 white catfish, 17,514 channel catfish, 44,011 threadfin shad, 65,763 American shad and 1,614 steelhead were ?salvaged? in the state and federal water export facilities from January 1 to July 11, 2011, according to Department of Fish and Game data. The number of splittail "salvaged" to date is greater than in any previous years since the federal and state governments started keeping records on splittail in 1993. The splittail is a member of the minnow family found only in the Central Valley and Delta, "And these 'salvage' numbers represent only the tip of the iceberg," Jennings emphasized. The overall loss of fish in and around the State Water Project and Central Valley Project facilities is believed to dwarf the actual salvage counts, according to "A Review of Delta Fish Population Losses from Pumping Operations in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta," prepared by Larry Walker Associates in January 2010 for the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (http://www.srcsd.com/pdf/dd/fishlosses.pdf). "The Walker report cites DFG and DWR studies as showing that 75% of fish entering Clifton Court Forebay are lost to predation in project facilities before they reach the salvage facilities," said Jennings. "An additional 20-30% are lost at the salvage facility louvers." Of the remaining fish actually salvaged, 1-12% are lost during handling and trucking operation and another 10-30% are lost to post-release predation because there are only 4 release sites, according to the report. The numbers are far worse for Delta smelt, as 94-99% are lost to predation in project facilities and virtually no salvaged delta smelt survive trucking and handling. "Fish losses at export facilities represent a staggering embezzlement of public trust resources belonging to all Californians," Jennings concluded. The DFG?s 2010 Fall Midwater Trawl survey revealed that fish populations were at or near historic lows. The 2010 survey documented that splittail were 0% of their 1998 population, striped bass were 0.2% of 1967 numbers, threadfin shad were 0.8% of 1997 numbers, American shad were 7.3% of 2003 numbers, longfin smelt were 0.2% of 1967 numbers and Delta smelt were 1.7% of 1970 numbers, according to Jennings. ?The massacre at the pumps pushes already-struggling salmon and native fish populations closer to extinction and is entirely unnecessary,? said Jeff Miller, conservation advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity. ?This is a high rainfall year, and there was no need for continued pumping at this level while so many fish were being killed. Excessive pumping and the highest-ever water diversions from the Delta the past decade have crippled Central Valley fish runs, including commercially valuable chinook salmon.? Splittail were formerly protected as a threatened species but illegally stripped of Endangered Species Act (ESA) protection in 2003. "The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service last fall made a controversial determination that the species does not warrant protection, despite the fact that numbers of splittail found in annual California Fish and Game surveys have fallen to consistently low levels since 2002, and that the estimated population from 2002 to 2010 has been the lowest recorded since surveys began in 1967," stated Miller. The Obama administration, in denying the splittail ESA protection in October 2010, claimed that the capture of huge numbers of fish by the pumping facilities in wet years has little impact on splittail abundance. ?Research has shown no evidence that south Delta water export operations have had a significant effect on splittail abundance, even though fish collection facilities can capture a large number of fish (up to 5.5 million) during wet years, when spawning on the San Joaquin River and other floodplains results in a spike in population numbers,? the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service contended in a press release in October 2010. ?The number of splittail captured by these facilities drops during dry years when recruitment is low (1,300 in 2007; about 5,000 in 2008) and the splittail is most vulnerable.? The carnage at the pumps continues as Republicans in Congress push legislation, HR 1837, to exempt export pumping in the Delta from Endangered Species Act protections for salmon, Delta smelt and other species and to block restoration efforts on the San Joaquin River. Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA), the darling of San Joaquin Valley corporate agribusiness interests, has authored the job-killing legislation that will devastate imperiled California fish populations and fishing communities. Rather than taking long-needed action to stop the carnage at the water export facilities, the Brown and Obama administrations, in the foot steps of the Schwarzenegger administration, are instead pushing for the construction of a peripheral canal or tunnel through the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to facilitate the export of more northern California to corporate agribusiness on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and southern California water agencies. A broad coalition of recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, family farmers, Indian Tribes, grassroots environmentalists and Delta residents is opposing the construction of the peripheral canal because it is likely to lead to the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt and other imperiled fish species. Many also oppose the BDCP because it puts the burden on the primary zone of the Delta and Sacramento River watershed for habitat restoration and mitigation for the massive diversion of northern California water by San Joaquin Valley agribusiness and Southern California. For more information, go to: http://www.calsport.org. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: aerial-view-of-tfcf.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 51092 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 13 10:35:58 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:35:58 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Central Valley Business Times- Agricultural water discharge approval is challenged Message-ID: <63313BCC-B70B-4D7F-9F80-95A32D543AA1@att.net> Agricultural water discharge approval is challenged http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=18869 STOCKTON July 12, 2011 12:33pm ? Environmental groups want immediate review ? ?It has turned our rivers into sewers? Approval of an extension of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program waiver and its environmental impact report by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board is being challenged by the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance and the California Water Impact Network. The waiver exempts irrigated agriculture from having to obtain waste discharge requirements for pollutant discharges to surface and ground waters. The Regional Board extended the waiver for two years at its June meeting. The appeal alleges that the board violated numerous laws and regulations, including the California Environmental Quality Act, the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and California?s Non-point Source Control and Antidegradation policies. The groups have also notified the State Water Resources Control Board that if it fails to take immediate action to consider their appeal by July 22, the groups will go to court to seek a writ of mandate to compel compliance with the California Administrative Code. ?Pollutant discharges from irrigated agriculture are the largest identified source of pollution to Central Valley waterways. It has turned our rivers into sewers, is a threat to public health and has been identified as a principle cause of the collapse of Central Valley fisheries,? says CSPA Executive Director Bill Jennings. ?The waiver extension continues to shield irrigated agriculture from reasonable rules applicable to everyone else and essentially protects polluters from the law rather than protecting our waterways from polluters," Mr. Jennings says. The waivers require farmers to join third-party coalitions that conduct regional water quality monitoring. Where water quality standards exceeded multiple times, management plans are required that describe the voluntary efforts coalitions will undertake to address problems, the environmental groups say. However, they contend, the coalitions shield the identities of actual dischargers from the Regional Board and, consequently, the board doesn?t know who is actually discharging, what pollutants are being discharged, the localized impacts, whether management measures are being implemented or if implemented measures are effective in reducing pollution. ?After almost a decade, the board cannot quantify or document a single pound of pollution prevented from entering surface or groundwater,? the two groups say. ?Every Californian has a right to clean water and its unacceptable to allow agribusiness to continue to use our rivers to dispose of toxic wastes,? says Carolee Krieger, president of the California Water Impact Network. CSPA describes itself as a non-profit public benefit conservation and research organization established in 1983 for the purpose of conserving, restoring and enhancing the state?s water quality, wildlife and fishery resources and their aquatic ecosystems and associated riparian habitats. CWIN describes itself as a non-profit California corporation that promotes the equitable and environmental use of California?s water, including in-stream uses, through research, planning, public education and litigation. Read the press release from the California Water Impact Network and the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance http://www.c-win.org/content/c-win-and-cspa-appeal-agricultural-waiver-and-eir.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: comments.gif Type: image/gif Size: 124 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 179 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: email.gif Type: image/gif Size: 139 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: digg.gif Type: image/gif Size: 311 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: newsvine.gif Type: image/gif Size: 117 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Wed Jul 13 14:44:17 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 14:44:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] AB 120 enrolled; pertains to suction dredge mining Message-ID: <4E1E11B1.8020709@tcrcd.net> Interested Parties, The legislative websitehttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_120&sess=CUR&house=B&author=committee_on_budget indicates that AB 120 was enrolled on July 12. I understand that to mean that it has gone to the Governor's Office for his consideration. I understand the Governor has 12 days to approve or veto legislation. I don't know for sure which date ends the 12 day period. If he takes no action, it is automatically approved. Mark Stopher Environmental Program Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 voice 530.225.2275 fax 530.225.2391 cell 530.945.1344 mstopher at dfg.ca.gov -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CA Suction Dredge EIR" group. To post to this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ca-suction-dredge-eir?hl=en. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: AB 120 - Enrolled Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:49:07 -0700 From: Mark Stopher Reply-To: mstopher at dfg.ca.gov To: Mark Stopher Interested Parties, The legislative website http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_120&sess=CUR&house=B&author=committee_on_budget indicates that AB 120 was enrolled on July 12. I understand that to mean that it has gone to the Governor's Office for his consideration. I understand the Governor has 12 days to approve or veto legislation. I don't know for sure which date ends the 12 day period. If he takes no action, it is automatically approved. Mark Stopher Environmental Program Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 voice 530.225.2275 fax 530.225.2391 cell 530.945.1344 mstopher at dfg.ca.gov -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CA Suction Dredge EIR" group. To post to this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ca-suction-dredge-eir?hl=en. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Wed Jul 13 14:44:17 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 14:44:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] AB 120 enrolled; pertains to suction dredge mining Message-ID: <4E1E11B1.8020709@tcrcd.net> Interested Parties, The legislative websitehttp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_120&sess=CUR&house=B&author=committee_on_budget indicates that AB 120 was enrolled on July 12. I understand that to mean that it has gone to the Governor's Office for his consideration. I understand the Governor has 12 days to approve or veto legislation. I don't know for sure which date ends the 12 day period. If he takes no action, it is automatically approved. Mark Stopher Environmental Program Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 voice 530.225.2275 fax 530.225.2391 cell 530.945.1344 mstopher at dfg.ca.gov -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CA Suction Dredge EIR" group. To post to this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ca-suction-dredge-eir?hl=en. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: AB 120 - Enrolled Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:49:07 -0700 From: Mark Stopher Reply-To: mstopher at dfg.ca.gov To: Mark Stopher Interested Parties, The legislative website http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_120&sess=CUR&house=B&author=committee_on_budget indicates that AB 120 was enrolled on July 12. I understand that to mean that it has gone to the Governor's Office for his consideration. I understand the Governor has 12 days to approve or veto legislation. I don't know for sure which date ends the 12 day period. If he takes no action, it is automatically approved. Mark Stopher Environmental Program Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 voice 530.225.2275 fax 530.225.2391 cell 530.945.1344 mstopher at dfg.ca.gov -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CA Suction Dredge EIR" group. To post to this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ca-suction-dredge-eir+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ca-suction-dredge-eir?hl=en. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 21 17:31:06 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 17:31:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity-Related news clips Message-ID: local farmers oppose listing of Klamath Chinook- Capital Press http://www.capitalpress.com/content/TH-klamath-chinook-w-infobox-072211 BuRec to put close to $2 million into Klamath studies ? Eureka Times Standard http://www.times-standard.com/news/ci_18520600 algae problems in some North coast rivers ? http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18505628?source=rss while salmon fishing is good off the North coast ? http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18505569?source=rss Doug Obegi of NRDC blogs about the record Delta exports and touches upon the important issue of both Fed & State water contracts calling for nearly impossible delivery volumes (this includes Trinity River water too!) ? http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dobegi/record_bay-delta_water_exports.html Siskiyou Daily News reports on presentation to local Supervisors of the scientific report questioning Klamath dam removal http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1223065266/Report-calls-dam-proposal-an-experiment Humboldt Bay Muni Water District's unique problem of having too much water available- Eureka Times Standard http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18482983 Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Fri Jul 22 08:35:11 2011 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:35:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Law review article on Klamath Agreements Message-ID: <4E2998AF.5050102@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jul 23 11:19:31 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 11:19:31 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher- Delta smelt numbers 'improve' as pumps kill millions of splittail References: <67EDDB31-E81F-43C2-BABA-3DA445487DF4@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <97997209-F655-48CC-905A-E24FADF11626@att.net> From: Dan Bacher Date: July 23, 2011 9:28:21 AM PDT Subject: Delta smelt numbers 'improve' as pumps kill millions of splittail http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/07/22 Photo of tow net survey courtesy of the Department of Fish and Game. jerricanet2.jpg Delta smelt numbers 'improve' as pumps kill millions of splittail by Dan Bacher Department of Fish and Game (DFG) officials announced on July 20 that young Delta smelt abundance this year roughly doubles that of last year, but noted that this is "but a small fraction of their historical abundance." "The improvement is likely due in large part to higher than usual flows from the San Joaquin and Sacramento rivers this year that resulted in better habitat conditions and water quality," according to a DFG news release. The announcement of "improved" Delta smelt numbers was issued as one of the greatest fish kills in California history continues to take place in the state and federal Delta pumps. A horrific total of 8,942,347 splittail, 35,435 chinook salmon, 385,392 striped bass, 49,812 largemouth bass, 67,383 bluegill, 66,403 white catfish, 20,178 channel catfish, 91,956 threadfin shad, 166,336 American shad, 1,642 steelhead and 51 Delta smelt were ?salvaged? in the state and federal water export facilities from January 1 to July 21, 2011, according to DFG data. The overall loss of fish in and around the State Water Project and Central Valley Project facilities is believed to dwarf the actual salvage counts, according to "A Review of Delta Fish Population Losses from Pumping Operations in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta," prepared by Larry Walker Associates in January 2010 for the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (http://www.srcsd.com/pdf/dd/fishlosses.pdf). Delta water exports may reach a record high! The massive loss of fish life in the "predatory" pumps occurs as the pumps are currently exporting record amounts of water to corporate agribusiness and southern California. "Exports from the Bay-Delta may reach an all-time high in 2011," according to Spreck Rosecrans, an economic analyst at Environmental Defense (http://blogs.edf.org/waterfront/2011/07/15/delta-exports-projected-to-reach-record-level-in-2011/). "Through July 15, pumping for the State Water Project and the Central Valley Project has totaled 4.86 million acre-feet. With ample supplies in northern reservoirs and Sierra rivers still full of melting snow, it is likely that the pumps will continue to run at or near capacity through the end of the water year (September 30)." The annual export total is projected to reach 6,610,000 acre-feet ? 140,000 acre-feet more than the previous record of 6,470,000 acre-feet set in 2005, Rosecrans noted. "The record export level is expected even though pumping levels were reduced not only during much of the winter and spring to protect salmon and other endangered fish but also in the late fall and early winter due to mechanical problems at State Water Project facilities," said Rosecranz. At the same time, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California is wholesaling water at discount prices, since southern California reservoirs have largely filled (http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_surplus11.3abcf4c.html). So all of these fish are dying - even though southern California is flush with water this year! Delta smelt are still on the verge of extinction As massive amounts of water continue to be exported from the Delta, the Delta smelt are still in great peril, in spite of this being a wet year. The 20-Millimeter Survey "index" of young Delta smelt abundance, developed yearly since 1995 and named after the approximate size of fish it collects, was 8.0 this year. By comparison, the index in 2010 was 3.8 and its record high was 39.7 in 1999. The Summer Tow Net Survey index of slightly-older Delta smelt abundance, developed yearly since 1959 and named after the type of net used to collect fish, was 2.2 this year while the index in 2010 was 0.8 and the record high was 62.5 in 1978. "The increased number of young Delta smelt is encouraging, but because it is still early in their one-year life cycle, the abundance of adults may or may not increase similarly," according to Marty Gingras, DFG Supervising Biologist. "DFG will continue to monitor the population and at the conclusion of the Fall Midwater Trawl Survey in December will calculate and then release an index of sub-adult Delta smelt abundance." Because it is exceptionally difficult to determine the actual number of Delta smelt, Department of Fish and Game (DFG) biologists use survey data to develop ?indices? of the species? abundance. An index is a number that is likely to vary in direct proportion to abundance. For example, if a hypothetical index were to double from 4 to 8 then abundance would also have doubled (e.g., from 200,000 to 400,000). Smelt collapse part of a larger decline Delta smelt are an indicator species that occur only in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The finger-sized fish was historically one of the most abundant in the Delta. However, the species declined substantially, due to massive exports of water to agribusiness and southern California and other factors, and was listed as "threatened" under the California and Federal Endangered Species acts (ESA) in 1993. After a further decline, the species was designated as "endangered" in 2010 under the California ESA. The collapse of Delta smelt occurs in the context of the Pelagic Organism Decline (POD). Since 2005, state and federal scientists have documented the alarming decline of pelagic (open water) species including Delta smelt, longfin smelt, threadfin shad and young striped bass. Factors behind the decline include increases in water exports, toxics, invasive species and ammonia pollution from sewage treatment plants. "The state and federal governments had the opportunity this year to reverse the decline of Central Valley salmon and Delta fish species," said Bill Jennings, executive director/chairman of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). "But what they are doing now is minimizing the rebound of fisheries that occurs in a wet year by pumping water at the maximum rate. The fish 'salvage' numbers are just the tip of the iceberg of the fish that are lost in the state and federal pumps." Rather than taking long-needed action to stop the carnage at the water export facilities, the Brown and Obama administrations, in the foot steps of the Schwarzenegger administration, are instead pushing for the construction of a peripheral canal or tunnel through the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to facilitate the export of more northern California to corporate agribusiness on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and southern California water agencies. For more information, go to: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/delta/data/townet/indices.asp?species=3and http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=34731. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jerricanet2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 22389 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jul 25 12:20:25 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:20:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Executive Director Position- The River Exchange Message-ID: <74F21A9A-5397-49A7-BEE3-F8285E9BCC51@att.net> Executive Director Position Do you know someone who is interested in leading a respected conservation organization working to promote healthy watersheds in the beautiful Mount Shasta region? The River Exchange (REX) is accepting applications for our Executive Director position. We are a non-profit, 501(c)(3) watershed stewardship organization located in Dunsmuir, California. REX fills a unique role in the region - proactively working to support and improve the health of the watershed ecosystem, educate and empower the community to be effective watershed stewards and facilitate cooperation of stakeholders in collaborative watershed management. This position is currently 70% time, although this may be negotiable. Salary will be dependent on qualifications and experience, with an expected range of $55,000 ? $60,000 per year at the full-time rate ($38,500 ? $42,000 at 70%). Application materials - including cover letter, resume, short writing sample and references - will be accepted in electronic format only through 9:00 p.m. on August 9, 2011. Please send application materials, or any requests for further information, to dea at riverexchange.org. See full job description below and additional information about the organization at www.riverexchange.org. REX Mission: Promoting healthy watersheds through community involvement in stewardship, restoration and education. Job Description The Executive Director of the River Exchange is the chief executive officer for the organization. The ED is responsible for all the day-to-day operations of the River Exchange and oversees the full range of activities normally conducted by a non-profit organization, including development of programs that meet the organization?s mission, policy development, financial management, fundraising, contract negotiations, grant compliance, public relations, agency partnerships and media relations. The ED is also responsible for the organization?s financial operations, including preparing and implementing an annual budget. The ED manages the following staff: Administrative Director, Research Director and Finance Director. All employees currently work a part-time schedule. The Executive Director is responsible for employee recruitment, management and evaluation. Reporting to a nine-member Board of Directors, the Executive Director is responsible for all Board relations and communications, plus preparation of agendas and reports for regular and special Board meetings. The successful candidate for this position will demonstrate knowledge of non-profit operations, budget experience, excellent written and oral communication skills and a strong background in fundraising, grant writing and grant administration - particularly with public agencies. The successful candidate will also have management experience and experience working with a non-profit board of directors. Knowledge and understanding of water issues in northern California is desirable and a demonstrated commitment to the environment and to the non-profit sector is a must. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 27 09:13:05 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 09:13:05 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Brown prolongs freeze on suction dredge mining Message-ID: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/07/27/3796886/brown-prolongs-freeze-on-suction.html Brown prolongs freeze on suction dredge mining calcala at sacbee.com PUBLISHED WEDNESDAY, JUL. 27, 2011 Gov. Jerry Brown signed the bill Tuesday to extend a moratorium on suction dredge mining for gold, cheering environmental opponents of the practice. The bill, AB 120, includes a five-year extension of an existing moratorium against the practice of suctioning river-bottom gravels in search of gold and other minerals. That would stop dredging at least until June 30, 2016. The bill also prohibits resumption of the practice until the Department of Fish and Game establishes regulations to safeguard the environment and cover costs of administering a dredging program. Earlier this month, Brown vetoed a bill that would have prevented Fish and Game from spending any money to develop the regulations. Environmental critics claim the mining stirs up toxic mercury in the river beds and damages sensitive fish breeding habitats. Miners have disputed those claims and counter that the regulations are an illegal hindrance to an economically important activity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Mon Aug 1 10:36:13 2011 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 09:36:13 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Research Models Show Coho Salmon At High Risk In Urbanizing Watersheds Message-ID: <20110801093625.83C5B589@dm0227.mta.everyone.net> THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com July 29, 2011 -- Issue No. 584 Research Models Show Coho Salmon At High Risk In Urbanizing Watersheds For a decade researchers in Seattle have worked to solve the mystery of why adult coho salmon are dying prematurely in urban streams when they return from the ocean to mate and spawn. In a study published in Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management researchers used models to estimate the potential impact of urban land development on the salmon population in the decades ahead. Stricken coho salmon show a syndrome of disorientation, equilibrium loss, and other symptoms of acute toxicity, which usually cause death within a few hours. In some watersheds as many as 90 percent of the returning fish are killed, yet juvenile coho and related salmon species remain unaffected, even in the same streams. "Forensic evidence currently points to toxic chemical contaminants in urban storm water runoff as the likely cause of the recurrent fish kills," said Julann Spromberg, from the National Marine Fisheries Service. "However, urban runoff is a complex soup containing mixtures of many different chemicals and we've yet to identify the smoking gun. With the forensic story still unfolding, this study looked at how wild coho populations might be affected by an increase in the geographic extent and severity of the spawner mortality syndrome over time." Spromberg and her colleague Nat Scholz focused their study on lowland urban streams around Puget Sound. As with the rest of the Pacific Northwest this area of lowland watersheds is undergoing substantial human population growth. By 2025, the population of the Puget Sound region is expected to rise from 4 million to 5.4 million people. "Currently there are many relatively healthy river systems that provide high quality freshwater habitat for wild coho in this area" said Spromberg. "However this may change if these watersheds acquire the urban land use characteristics that typify the Seattle-area urban drainages where coho spawners are currently dying in high proportions." The authors constructed a virtual coho population, with conventional rates of survival and straying based on the published literature. They then imposed spawner mortality on different segments of the population, based on actual rates observed from spawning surveys of urban creeks in recent years which allowed them to estimate timelines for local population extinction. The models showed that the proportion of the population affected was a more important factor that the overall rate of mortality. One scenario that simulated rapid urbanization forecast an increase in pre-spawn mortality from 0 to 75 percent over 20 years. When rates were increased to 75 percent over 20 years, the model predicted the extinction of a solitary coho population in 30 years. Lastly, the modeling effort revealed how production from high quality habitat areas within large river basins might mask local declines in coho abundance due to spawner losses. "While our findings are for virtual populations, our models capture the basic dynamics of how wild coho may respond to the mortality syndrome at a population scale. This will help natural resource managers anticipate future threats to coho conservation and recovery in Puget Sound and elsewhere in the Pacific Northwest," concluded Spromberg. "Our next steps include incorporating storm water impacts on embryo and juvenile survival rates as well as refining the models by expanding the range of input data to reflect different types of future land uses." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bhill at igc.org Mon Aug 1 17:12:18 2011 From: bhill at igc.org (Brian Hill) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 17:12:18 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: ~ Gray Whale swims up the Klamath River with a Message Message-ID: <00bb01cc50a8$ddfc5090$99f4f1b0$@org> From: Robert Brothers [mailto:bobcat at post.harvard.edu] Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 3:15 PM To: Friends Subject: ~ Gray Whale swims up the Klamath River with a Message Dear Friends, A female Gray Whale swam up the Klamath River 5 weeks ago and has been swimming directly under the Hwy 101 bridge where she has been seen by thousands. Authorities thought her to be in trouble, and have tried to help by scaring her back to sea. However, she has her own reasons for visiting us. Click on this link, Listening to the Whale to hear the story, and Greg King's interpretation of her message: "This is our home. This is your home. There is no other. There is no other time but now. Please help us all." Love, Bobcat p.s. Please email Sarah Wilkin, the lead scientist who has been trying to help this whale by using unpleasant noises to move her back to the ocean, thank her for her good intentions, and ask that she now focus on helping the whale be comfortable and undisturbed wherever she may wish to be: sarah.wilkin at noaa.gov (c) Greg King Robert Brothers, Ph.D. facilitator, Earth Devotion Support, www.EarthDevotion.org, and GoodNews FortheEarth on Facebook facilitator, Blessing Mount Ashland, www.blessingmountainsinthesnow.org board member, Lomakatsi Restoration Project, www.lomakatsi.org helper, Agnes Baker Pilgrim Fund, www.agnesbakerpilgrim.org 707-601-0818 _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3803 - Release Date: 08/01/11 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Gray Whale, girlwhale, Greg King.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 23325 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 2 15:08:08 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:08:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Sacramento Valley farmers lose area-of-origin lawsuit Message-ID: Sacramento Valley farmers lose area-of-origin lawsuit By HEATHER HACKING - Staff Writer Posted: 08/02/2011 12:07:05 AM PDT http://www.chicoer.com/news/ci_18599434 FRESNO ? A case for area-of-origin water rights in the Sacramento Valley was shot down Friday by a federal court judge. The Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority, with landowners in Tehama, Glenn, Colusa, and Yolo counties, made the case that its water users should have priority in dry years over federal water contractors south of the Delta. In 10 of the past 33 years, Tehama-Colusa has received less than its full water contract, causing shortages on the 150,000 acres of land it services, water managers said. The issue dates back to assurances made when water infrastructure was built to deliver water throughout the state, said water attorney Steve Saxton of the firm Downy Brand, and even further back than that, back to the 1920s. At the crux of the argument is California Water Code 11460. It states that in an "area wherein water originates, or an area immediately adjacent thereto which can conveniently be supplied with water," the area "shall not be deprived by the department directly or indirectly of the prior right to all of the water reasonably required ..." for beneficial needs. These are the state rules, and the Central Valley Project is federally operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. However, there are also rules that require the federal government to follow state law, Saxton explained. In 2006 a water case worked its way through the court system, providing what is called "the Roby decision." In this case, California appellate Judge Ronald Roby ruled that the federal Bureau of Reclamation was required to follow those state rules, Saxton continued. This provided some new case law for Tehama-Colusa to file the most recent lawsuit. But the two cases were not identical, and last week U.S. District Court Judge Oliver Wanger ruled against Tehama-Colusa's legal arguments. After the loss of the case, Tehama-Colusa's board will meet and decide whether to appeal the decision, General Manager Jeff Sutton said. Saxton said the basis for Wanger's decision was that offering area-of-origin priority to Tehama-Colusa would "interfere with the congressional direction of the Bureau of Reclamation to operate the (Central Valley Project) for the widest public benefit," Saxton said. The judge's decision is 88 pages, and the attorney said he'll be reading through it very carefully. Tehama-Colusa's argument was that before water is exported out of the Sacramento Valley, the local water authority should receive 100 percent of its water. "The judge disagreed," Saxton said. Sutton said now is a very critical time for water rights protection."With several state processes and congressional legislation coming out" there are attempts "to find more solutions to export more water out of the Sacramento Valley." If laws and assurances given to water users "are rendered meaningless, it could have huge impacts to north state water supplies," Sutton, of Tehama-Colusa, said. Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority, based in Willows, is a joint powers authority that includes 17 water districts, and a system of canals covering 140 miles. The Central Valley Project, operated by the federal government and including Shasta Dam, is separate from the State Water Project, which is operated by the state and includes Lake Oroville. Staff writer Heather Hacking can be reached at 896-7758 or hhacking at chicoer.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 2 15:33:44 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:33:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] National Geographic article on Klamath Dam removal Message-ID: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/07/110725-/salmon-california-dam-klamath-river-water/ Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Aug 2 16:14:00 2011 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 16:14:00 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Sacramento Valley farmers lose area-of-origin lawsuit In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <36D97F9D-EBFC-4152-925A-D6116759FBE4@fishsniffer.com> That really sucks! dan On Aug 2, 2011, at 3:08 PM, Tom Stokely wrote: > Sacramento Valley farmers lose area-of-origin lawsuit > > By HEATHER HACKING - Staff Writer > Posted: 08/02/2011 12:07:05 AM PDT > http://www.chicoer.com/news/ci_18599434 > > > FRESNO ? A case for area-of-origin water rights in the Sacramento > Valley was shot down Friday by a federal court judge. > The Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority, with landowners in Tehama, > Glenn, Colusa, and Yolo counties, made the case that its water > users should have priority in dry years over federal water > contractors south of the Delta. > In 10 of the past 33 years, Tehama-Colusa has received less than > its full water contract, causing shortages on the 150,000 acres of > land it services, water managers said. > The issue dates back to assurances made when water infrastructure > was built to deliver water throughout the state, said water > attorney Steve Saxton of the firm Downy Brand, and even further > back than that, back to the 1920s. > At the crux of the argument is California Water Code 11460. It > states that in an "area wherein water originates, or an area > immediately adjacent thereto which can conveniently be supplied > with water," the area "shall not be deprived by the department > directly or indirectly of the prior right to all of the water > reasonably required ..." for beneficial needs. > These are the state rules, and the Central Valley Project is > federally operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. > However, there are also rules that require the federal government > to follow state law, Saxton explained. > In 2006 a water case worked its way through the court system, > providing what is called "the Roby decision." In this case, > California appellate Judge Ronald Roby > > > ruled that the federal Bureau of Reclamation was required to follow > those state rules, Saxton continued. > This provided some new case law for Tehama-Colusa to file the most > recent lawsuit. > But the two cases were not identical, and last week U.S. District > Court Judge Oliver Wanger ruled against Tehama-Colusa's legal > arguments. > After the loss of the case, Tehama-Colusa's board will meet and > decide whether to appeal the decision, General Manager Jeff Sutton > said. > Saxton said the basis for Wanger's decision was that offering area- > of-origin priority to Tehama-Colusa would "interfere with the > congressional direction of the Bureau of Reclamation to operate the > (Central Valley Project) for the widest public benefit," Saxton said. > The judge's decision is 88 pages, and the attorney said he'll be > reading through it very carefully. > Tehama-Colusa's argument was that before water is exported out of > the Sacramento Valley, the local water authority should receive 100 > percent of its water. > "The judge disagreed," Saxton said. > Sutton said now is a very critical time for water rights > protection."With several state processes and congressional > legislation coming out" there are attempts "to find more solutions > to export more water out of the Sacramento Valley." > If laws and assurances given to water users "are rendered > meaningless, it could have huge impacts to north state water > supplies," Sutton, of Tehama-Colusa, said. > Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority, based in Willows, is a joint powers > authority that includes 17 water districts, and a system of canals > covering 140 miles. > The Central Valley Project, operated by the federal government and > including Shasta Dam, is separate from the State Water Project, > which is operated by the state and includes Lake Oroville. > > Staff writer Heather Hacking can be reached at 896-7758 or > hhacking at chicoer.com. > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 2 17:00:10 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:00:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Tehama Colusa Canal Authority Decision Message-ID: <5D0ADE8E-3A29-4520-ADBC-0CA82B1A4C56@att.net> The decision on the Tehama Colusa Canal Authority's lawsuit regarding area of origin can be found at the website below: http://www.schlosserlawfiles.com/%7Ehoopa/Tehama-ColusaOpinion080211.pdf Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Wed Aug 3 15:47:45 2011 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 15:47:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] News Release Nominations 2011 Message-ID: Hi Folks, If you are interested in becoming a member of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG), nominations must be submitted by September 16, 2011. (See attached file: News Release Final_2011.pdf) Thank you, Vina Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: News Release Final_2011.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 110862 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 5 09:56:44 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 09:56:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture Coho Salmon Informational Hearing - 8/16/11 10am Capitol Bldg Rm 4202 References: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F706B4A244E8@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> Message-ID: From: "Weseloh, Tom" Date: August 4, 2011 5:03:22 PM PDT To: "Weseloh, Tom" Subject: Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture Coho Salmon Informational Hearing - 8/16/11 10am Capitol Bldg Rm 4202 Assemblyman Chesbro, Chair of the Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture, will convene a Coho Salmon Informational Hearing in the Capitol Building, Room 4020 on Tuesday August 16, 2011 beginning at 10:00 a.m. Please save the date. The agenda will include many speakers providing testimony on Coho salmon issues throughout California. Speakers include: John McCamman, Director Department of Fish and Game; Rod McInnis, Regional Administrator National Marine Fisheries Service and Catherine Kuhlman, Executive Director North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The State (DFG and NCRWQCB) and federal (NMFS) agencies will provide information on current population status and trends as well as recovery plans and action items. Additionally, several panels of presenters will address: regional updates, population dynamics, fishery impacts, instream flow problems/solutions, estuary and off-channel habitat requirements, forest practices/watershed restoration/large woody debris enhancement, captive rearing, and more. Presenters are encouraged to provide clear, concise recommendations for legislative and administrative actions that will prevent extinction and expedite recovery of coho salmon in California. Additional information and agendas will be distributed next week. Assemblyman Chesbro hopes you will be able to attend. Please distribute as appropriate and reply with requests to be removed from the list. I apologize for any duplicate emails. Regards, Tom Weseloh Consultant Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture c/o Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro 710 E Street, Suite 150 Eureka, CA 95501 707.445.7014 x10 Tom.weseloh at asm.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Aug 6 10:24:09 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2011 10:24:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] KMTG Legal Alert- Tehama Colusa Canal Authority Area of Origin case Message-ID: There is a very informative legal analysis of the recent TCCA Area of Origin Court Case from the law firm Kronick, Moskovitz,Tiedemann and Girard at: http://www.kmtg.com/data/rc_legal_alerts/alert___1181938872.php Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 10 15:02:32 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:02:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Coho Salmon Informational Hearing - speaker information References: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F70B8BF28BEA@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: "Weseloh, Tom" Date: August 10, 2011 2:46:10 PM PDT To: "Weseloh, Tom" Subject: Coho Salmon Informational Hearing - speaker information The Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture is holding a Coho Salmon Informational Hearing, ?Coho Salmon on the Brink: Understanding the Depth of the Crisis and Recovery Actions?. The hearing will be in the Capitol Building, Room 4202 on Tuesday August 16, 2011 beginning at 10:00 a.m. The agenda is attached for your convenience. For More Information: The hearing may be broadcast on Assembly television and the California Channel: http://www.calchannel.com/. We plan to provide links to additional resources and information as well as presenters agencies/organizations on Assemblyman Chesbro?s web site:http://asmdc.org/members/a01/ (under development - a ?spotlight? that will say ?Hearing: Coho Salmon on the Brink?). The Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture has contact information at: http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/newcomframeset.asp?committee=416 Assemblyman Chesbro and the Committee look forward to your presence at the hearing. Please contact me with any questions. Thank you, Tom Weseloh Consultant Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture c/o Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro 710 E Street, Suite 150 Eureka, CA 95501 707.445.7014 x10 Tom.weseloh at asm.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Final agenda.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 960270 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From PManza at usbr.gov Wed Aug 10 16:01:19 2011 From: PManza at usbr.gov (Manza, Peggy L) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:01:19 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Release Changes Message-ID: Please make the following release changes at Lewiston Dam: Date time from (cfs) to (cfs) 8-28-11 0800 450 550 8-28-11 1000 550 650 8-28-11 1200 650 900 8-28-11 1400 900 1150 8-28-11 1600 1150 1400 8-28-11 1800 1400 1650 8-28-11 2000 1650 1900 8-28-11 2200 1900 2150 8-28-11 2400 2150 2650 8-30-11 0001 2650 2450 8-30-11 0400 2450 2250 8-30-11 0800 2250 2050 8-30-11 1200 2050 1850 8-30-11 1600 1850 1750 8-30-11 2000 1750 1650 8-30-11 2400 1650 1550 8-31-11 0400 1550 1450 8-31-11 0800 1450 1350 8-31-11 1200 1350 1250 8-31-11 1600 1250 1150 8-31-11 2000 1150 1050 8-31-11 2400 1050 950 9-01-11 0400 950 850 9-01-11 0800 850 750 9-01-11 1200 750 650 9-01-11 1600 650 550 9-01-11 2000 550 450 Ordered by: Peggy Manza Note: Ceremonial Use -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 22 14:23:21 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:23:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Gray whale dies in Klamath River References: <3D21D1C8-3BC6-4222-BF6F-D849EA4B9A2C@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <1C73BD18-6CFE-4E8A-BAF1-EB1C8786F496@att.net> From: Dan Bacher Date: August 16, 2011 7:47:46 PM PDT Subject: Gray whale dies in Klamath River http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/08/16/gray-whale-passes-away-in-klamath-river/ Photo of gray whale courtesy of Ashala Taylor. Gray whale dies in Klamath River by Dan Bacher The female gray whale that drew considerable public attention by staying the greater part of this summer in the lower Klamath River died of natural causes in the early morning of Tuesday, August 16. The 40-foot long whale beached herself around 6:30 p.m. Monday and perished at 4:19 a.m.Tuesday after spending 53 days in the river. The cetacean's health had been deteriorating in the past two days, most likely because of the lengthy stay outside of its natural, saline habitat, according to a news release from the Yurok Tribe. This is the apparently the longest time that a whale has ventured outside of its normal saltwater habitat in California waters. "To have such a large animal in our presence for so long was a great gift, but now nature has taken its course," said Yurok Tribal Chairman Thomas O'Rourke Sr. "It is truly unfortunate that she didn't try to make it back to her home." This is not the first whale to swim up a river or estuary in California. "Humphrey the Whale," a humpback whale, ventured up the Sacramento River near Rio Vista in 1984. "Delta and Dawn," a mother humpback whale and her calf, went up the Sacramento into the Sacramento Deepwater Channel as far as West Sacramento in early May 2007. Fortunately, all three of those whales eventually returned to the ocean. The last time a whale entered the Klamath River was in 1989. That whale exited the river without incident. The whale that perished this morning entered the river with a calf on June 24. The calf, which likely weaned, returned to the ocean on July 23, but the mother stayed. "The Yurok Tribe has assisted NOAA and Humboldt State University scientists monitor the baleen whale since it swam up the Klamath River on June 24 and will continue to aid the federal agency and the university," according to Matt Mais of the Yurok Tribe. "The group tried in several ways ranging in intensity to encourage the marine mammal to go back to the ocean with no success." Mais said thousands of motorists took the opportunity to whale watch from the Highway 101 bridge just south of the town of Klamath where the baleen beauty spent most of her time. The rare occurrence raised awareness about gray whales in California waters. Members of the Yurok Tribe's Fisheries Program helped facilitate the sampling of the whale's skin and breath in an effort to determine its condition during her stay, according to Mais. The team from the tribe, federal government and university also did tests to find out if there was enough food for the whale in the river and if the water was deep enough if she chose to return to the ocean. Most gray whales migrate 10,000 miles from the arctic to Baja California. Every year, a small number of Eschrichtius Robustus don?t make the entire migration back and linger from Northern California to British Columbia. It is believed that the mother and calf were part of this small group. "Biologists hypothesize that the mother might have brought the yearling into the river to avoid a predator such as killer whale or a great white shark," according to a statement earlier this summer by the Yurok Tribe. "The highly intelligent mammals could also simply be curious." When a whale enters the river it is an indicator, according to Yurok culture. ?It?s a sign that things are working good,? said Yurok Elder Walt Lara Sr. ?It?s a part of the world renewal structure when they come and visit us. It?s pretty touching to me. It?s something that?s supposed to happen.? Unfortunately, the gray whale's health deteriorated after spending too much time away from her saltwater habitat and the cetacean passed away. The Yurok Tribe, NOAA and HSU are putting together a plan to remove the cetacean. Craig Tucker, the Klamath Campaign Coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, his wife, Amy Sprowles, and his two sons, 7-year-old Carson and 4-year-old Calhoun, went to see the whale over the weekend. "We'll really miss her," said Tucker. "It was a remarkable thing seeing her in the river. She came to the river to tell us something; we should think about the message she was trying to send us." The Yurok Tribe's commercial salmon fishery on the Klamath River is set to start Sunday and the Yurok Tribal Council passed a plan to shut down the fishery if the whale started heading back to sea. For more information, go to: http://yuroktribe.org/documents/whale_press_release_000.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 6a0120a77b966b970b014e8a83b5b3970d-350wi.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16377 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 22 14:25:43 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:25:43 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Basin Science Proceedings available 2010 Message-ID: <8C9F29C9-B7D8-442E-98FF-26F9C0570F75@att.net> http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2877 Klamath Basin Science Captured in Conference Proceedings Released: 8/11/2011 1:00:00 PM Contact Information: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey Office of Communications and Publishing 12201 Sunrise Valley Dr, MS 119 Reston, VA 20192 Lyman Thorsteinson Phone: 206-526-6282 ext. 235 SEATTLE ? Science papers, posters, and other types of information used to inform and update Klamath Basin public and private sector stakeholders at the 2010 Klamath Basin Science Conference have been published by the USGS in an Open File Report that is now available online. The report, which contains information developed by a wide variety of federal, state, and local agencies and institutions, identifies stakeholders? outstanding information needs and science priorities as they relate to whole watershed management, restoration ecology, and possible reintroduction of Pacific salmon associated with the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. It includes the current understanding of the Klamath Basin ecosystem with respect to the most relevant issues for natural resource conservation, ecological restoration, and possible reintroduction of salmon associated with possible dam removals. This science conference, the first in which science needs and priorities were discussed for the entire basin, featured constructive engagement with a diverse cross-section of stakeholders ranging from key representatives from the Klamath Basin Tribes, Klamath Basin counties, federal and state agencies, and nongovernmental organizations and included specialists such as fish biologists, hydrologists, irrigators, and other water users and regulators. A watershed approach, couched in an ecological risk assessment framework, was planned by meeting organizers to focus attention of conference presentations on (1) linkages between upper and lower subbasins; (2) ecosystem processes and interactions; (3) drivers, stressors, and high-level indicators of change; and (4) identification of priority needs as they relate to the management of valued resources or environmental conditions. The Open File Report, Proceedings of the Klamath Basin Science Conference, Medford, Oregon, February 1?5, 2010, was edited by Lyman Thorsteinson and Scott VanderKooi (USGS Western Fisheries Research Center, Seattle, Wash., and Klamath Falls, Ore., respectively) and Walter Duffy (USGS California Cooperative Fisheries Research Unit, Arcata, Calif.). USGS provides science for a changing world. Visit USGS.gov, and follow us on Twitter @USGS and our other social media channels. Subscribe to our news releases via e-mail, RSS or Twitter. Links and contacts within this release are valid at the time of publication. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1click.gif Type: image/gif Size: 570 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: button0-share.gif Type: image/gif Size: 325 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 22 14:42:01 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:42:01 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Position Announcement- CA Coastkeeper Alliance Executive Director Message-ID: <69263FBE-E4A7-4AC9-BDC9-C6E466AA1C32@att.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Job Description CCKA ED.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 35995 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 22 13:46:48 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 13:46:48 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Junction City weir trapping totals References: <4E410F72.1B1D.0039.0@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: From: Wade Sinnen Date: August 9, 2011 10:45:08 AM PDT To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Junction City weir trapping totals To interested parties, This is the first report for the 2011-12 season. The attached spreadsheet contains trapping totals at Junction City weir for the week of July 30 - Aug. 5. Please review the "INFO" tab within the spreadsheet for information pertaining to our operations and methods. Please note that trapping totals at both Junction City and Willow Creek weirs are not population estimates or complete counts. The counts represent a sub-sample of the total fish passing the weir sites. The Willow Creek weir will be installed in late August/early September and Trinity River Hatchery will commence spawning operations in early September. If you have any questions regarding the information presented please reply to this email. Regards, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Biologist Supervisor Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 84992 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 22 14:18:52 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:18:52 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Junction City weir trapping report- through Aug.12 References: <4E4A33D0.1B1D.0039.0@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: From: Wade Sinnen Date: August 16, 2011 9:10:35 AM PDT To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Junction City weir trapping report- through Aug.12 Folks, Attached is the most recent trapping data for Junction City weir. Please respond to this email if you have any questions. Regards, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Biologist Supervisor Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 84992 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 22 14:52:10 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:52:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River presentation by DFG References: <4E4D4405.80CE.003D.0@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: <8897DD49-B052-41DB-BB3E-B23BB057F253@att.net> Here is a recent presentation by Wade Sinnen of DFG on Trinity River fisheries in pdf format. Sincerely, Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Trinity River Run-size Estimation 2011 WS.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 999699 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Tue Aug 23 10:55:49 2011 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 10:55:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group meeting Sept 2011 Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group is scheduled to meet on September 12, 2011. The discussion topics are listed in the notice. [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 162 (Monday, August 22, 2011)] [Notices] [Pages 52345-52346] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ http://www.gpo.gov/] [FR Doc No: 2011-21333] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2011-N168; 81331-1334-8TWG-W4] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a TAMWG meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG will meet from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Monday, September 12, 2011. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Trinity County Library, 351 Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Randy A. Brown, TAMWG Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River [[Page 52346]] Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Robin Schrock, Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623-1800; e-mail: rschrock at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a meeting of the TAMWG. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: High flow event results, Process and schedule for review of Phase 1 channel rehabilitation projects, FY 2012 TRRP budget and program of work, Roles and responsibilities of Program participants, Hatchery study, Watersheds work program, Public outreach efforts, TRRP science program, Klamath River conditions and possible supplemental water release, Executive Director's report, TMC chair report, and Designated Federal Officer topics. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. Dated: August 16, 2011. Randy A. Brown, Deputy Field Supervisor, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2011-21333 Filed 8-19-11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P Best regards, Vina Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 23 12:25:32 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 12:25:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- PacifiCorp Continues to Pollute With Permission Message-ID: <7B69870D-03CF-46B9-B2DE-233B6E7C44C8@att.net> PacifiCorp Continues to Pollute With Permission http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/08/pacificorp-continues-to-pollute-with-permission/ Clean Water Act Deteriorates on Klamath River By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune PacifiCorp is on deck to receive yet another abeyance of its California Clean Water section 401 certification today at the State Water Resources Control Board meeting in Sacramento further delaying the power producer?s obligation to reduce its pollution of the Klamath River. Prior to the culmination of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement?two linked deals that compromise permanent water deliveries to agricultural interest for the removal of four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River in California and Oregon?the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had nearly finished its process to re-license the antiquated dams. The final step, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process and the Clean Water Act Section 401 certification, was stalled in 2008 because of a commitment amongst the Interior Secretary, numerous stakeholders, and PacifiCorp to enter into serious negotiations under an Agreement in Principle. Those negotiations were completed in February of 2010 when the Interior Secretary, along with then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, and then Governor Ted Kulongoski of Oregon met in Salem, Ore. to sign the documents. Dozens of stakeholders also signed, including several Klamath River Tribes and environmental groups. Legislation was due to be enacted by May 10, 2010, but it was not, and has not. Although three tribes signed, three did not; The Hoopa Valley Tribe, the Resighini Rancheria and the Quartz Valley Indian Reservation. Also, several environmental groups were either excluded from the negotiations or voluntarily left the table because of their disagreement. There are rumors that Oregon Senator, Jeff Merkley plans to circulate a draft discussion bill in the near future, however, the rumors have not yet been confirmed. The current Water Board resolution proposes to delete all deadlines for enactment of federal legislation. ?This is simple avoidance of the Board?s duty to protect California water quality,? Hoopa Valley Tribal Council member, Hayley Hutt said. ?Stop hoping that the KHSA will do this Board?s work. Instead, they need to complete the CEQA [California Environmental Quality Act] analysis on PacifiCorp?s Section 401 application.? The Hoopa Valley Tribal Environmental Protection Agency (TEPA) regularly tests water quality on the portion of the Klamath River that passes through the Hoopa Reservation. According to TEPA Director, Ken Norton, recent tests confirm what the Tribe suspected?levels of total phosphorous, nitrogen and blue-green algae exceed applicable standards. ?The Water Board?s resolution says to continue the abeyance until the Secretarial Determination (due in March of 2012), but what they do not say is that the Secretary cannot legally make a determination if dam removal is in the best interest of the public until federal legislation is introduced,? Hutt said. Hutt will testify in front of the Water Board today in Sacramento. Although proponents are equally frustrated with the delay in progress to improve Klamath River water quality, they stand by the Settlements they negotiated and signed. Craig Tucker, the Klamath Campaign Coordinator for the Karuk Tribe said that the Karuk Tribe continues to believe that a negotiated settlement is the surest way to dam removal. ?I?ll stand by that until proven otherwise,? he said. Tucker emphasized that the introduction of federal legislation must occur by March, at the latest, and the stall is not due in any part to the parties. ?It hasn?t been for people?s lack of trying and effort,? he said. ?We are now on Congress? clock. We need to get behind it and move it forward.? Sean Stevens from Oregon Wild, a large non-profit environmental group based out of Portland, Ore. said the group has tried to stop the Water Board from giving PacifiCorp a free pass to continue polluting the Klamath River. ?Now that there?s a science report that says it?s unclear if dam removal will reduce pollution in the Klamath River, it?s even more important for the Water Board to address water quality in the Klamath River with or without the Settlements,? Stevens said. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 23 12:29:17 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 12:29:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] A True Fish Tale: Ft. Bragg Now -- New SWN Video References: Message-ID: <412DF320-9468-42AC-A323-01CBD857BCA2@att.net> > From: Bruce Tokars > Date: August 23, 2011 5:44:44 AM PDT > To: Bruce Tokars > Subject: A True Fish Tale: Ft. Bragg Now -- New SWN Video > > Greetings -- > > A couple of weeks ago we received a couple of phone calls from fishermen in Fort Bragg. The salmon were big and biting. The river was full of boats. The callers encouraged us to grab the SWN video camera and get up there to document this happy scene. We apparently missed the really intense scene by a week but there was still plenty of activity happening on the water, in the harbor, and on the streets of the town when we finally did get there. So we shot for a couple of days and then went home to edit. > > Information about our new video is below. As always, sharing and embedding is encouraged. We hope you enjoy the new video as it really is a positive story! You can watch it here: > > > A True Fish Tale: Fort Bragg Now > > Watch it on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdTRinu5O9M&hd=1 > > Watch it on Vimeo: http://www.vimeo.com/27981032 > > > A True Fish Tale: Fort Bragg Now (10:35) > > Imagine being told by the government that you can no longer do the work you?ve been doing because the government just made it an illegal activity. Sorry, you?ll have to find something else to do. > > That happened in 2008 when it became illegal to fish for salmon off the coast of California and Oregon. > > Suddenly, families dependent on having healthy runs of wild salmon were put out of business. The towns that relied on salmon fishing to support local businesses were tragically on their way to economic ruin. A grim reality. A reality caused by a sharp and unexpected decline of wild salmon populations that came as a result of excessive water diversions in salmon habitat. Because the salmon water was now flowing to Westside Central Valley agribusiness and Southern California. Water needed by salmon to thrive. > > Three years after the salmon fishing ban started, it was lifted. Finally, the towns that depended on salmon fishing were back in business. > > Fort Bragg, California is not that easy to get to. But when salmon are fishable, people flock to the town. Salmon are an economic magnet. > > Other then being in Fort Bragg yourself, there is no better way to see just how much an impact that salmon have then by watching this Salmon Water Now video. The town went through horrible economic misery while salmon fishing was banned. Look at it now! > > A True Fish Tale: Fort Bragg Now, without a single word of narration, makes a powerful counter-point to the silence on the subject by Westlands Water District and other Central Valley water irrigators who demand more and more water. > > There is enough water in California for both agriculture and salmon. As you can see in this video, making sure water is fairly allocated is critical. We hope our pictures, and the words of the people in Fort Bragg, make a lasting impression on those who would dismiss the cultural and economic importance of wild salmon. > > A True Fish Tale: Fort Bragg Now > > Watch it on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdTRinu5O9M&hd=1 > > Watch it on Vimeo: http://www.vimeo.com/27981032 > > > > > > > Bruce Tokars > www.salmonwaternow.org > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Tue Aug 23 12:40:02 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 12:40:02 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] A True Fish Tale: Ft. Bragg Now -- New SWN Video In-Reply-To: <412DF320-9468-42AC-A323-01CBD857BCA2@att.net> References: <412DF320-9468-42AC-A323-01CBD857BCA2@att.net> Message-ID: <20110823194026.QUZG10785.omta01.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 23 13:16:42 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 13:16:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Western Shasta RCD District Mgr Job Announcement Message-ID: 6270 Parallel Road ? Anderson, CA 96007-4833 ? Phone: (530) 365-7332 ? Fax: (530) 365-7271 http://www.westernshastarcd.org Western Shasta RCD District Manager Employment Opportunity Mission of the RCD: The mission of Western Shasta RCD is to work with willing landowners, government agencies and other organizations in the conservation and restoration of western Shasta County?s natural resources. About the RCD: The Western Shasta Resource Conservation District (RCD) has been working with willing landowners, government agencies and other organizations since 1957. The RCD?s strategic areas of focus include: Watershed restoration Healthy forests and fire safety Cost-sharing programs for ranchers, farmers, and other landowners to promote healthy ecosystems Expanding natural resource education programs Carbon sequestration programs to help mitigate climate change Habitat mitigation programs Expanding natural resource education programs Expanding the RCD?s capacity and competence to plan and deliver a broad range of conservation programs. In 1999 and again in 2010, the RCD was named ?District of the Year? by the California Association of RCDs and in 2010 the RCD Board President received the ?Director of the Year? award. In 2006, the RCD Technical Team received the ?California Governor?s Award? for Ecosystem Restoration for the multi-million dollar Lower Clear Creek Floodway Rehabilitation Project. The RCD does not receive any property tax revenue--it is funded totally by service and grant agreements with various agencies, local government units, and organizations. RCD staff are currently implementing 33 service agreements and 24 grant agreements that total $8,702,910. The budget for 2011-2012 is $2.3 million. Wage Range: $47,840 to $58,240 depending on experience. Benefits include health insurance, 401K with 3% match, 10 holidays and two personal days each year. Timeline: The current District Manager will be retiring in summer 2012 and the board desires to have a replacement hired January 2, 2012 to assure a successful transition. Interested candidates: Please submit a resume, including at least three references, to: Kathy Callan, Director, Western Shasta RCD, 6270 Parallel Road, Anderson, CA 96007. For an information packet, send an email request to: mary at westernshastarcd.org or call (530) 365-7332 ext. 202. District Manager Position Description The District Manager is the chief administrative officer of the District, reporting to the Board of Directors, and is responsible for managing and directing the District?s internal business operations consistent with the strategic plan, goals and objectives, and policies and procedures established by the Board. Duties 1. Actively seek out and supervise the preparation of grant proposals that continue and maintain the work of the RCD at the level of operations directed by the Board of Directors. Coordinate with the Projects Managers in determining the scope and budget for any grant proposal to assure it fits with the mission, goals, expertise and current staffing levels of the RCD. 2. Administer and supervise all aspects of the District?s office operations. Office operations include supervising Fiscal Officer and Administrative Assistant, providing leadership and guidance for completion of assigned duties. Administration includes: ? Completion and submission of all grant reports ? Maintenance of all business and personnel files ? Overseeing all insurance-related issues ? Updating of financial policies ? Updating of personnel policies and personnel records ? Developing an annual work plan and annual report ? Coordinating the preparation for monthly Board meetings ? Overseeing office space or capital equipment needs ? Providing updates to the Board ? Any other administrative activities pertaining to the operation of the District. 3. Administer and supervise the District?s Projects Managers, and provide leadership and guidance for completion of assigned duties. Administration includes monitoring grant budgets vs. actual expenditures and operations to insure the scope and budget for any field operation grant is maintained on time and within budget. Administration also includes insuring that the record keeping for each grant would successfully pass an audit. 4. Administer, supervise, and coordinate the preparation of annual budgets, timely revenue and expense reporting, financial forecasts, audits, or any other information required to keep the Board advised of the District?s financial condition. Supervise any outside services as required. 5. Ensure that statutes and government rules and regulations pertaining to or affecting District operations are followed. Coordinate with legal counsel and auditors as required. 6. Create, maintain or update the District?s strategic plan and annual work plan. 7. Administer the RCD?s participation in watershed or community groups. 8. Schedule regular staff training and supervise the District?s public education activities, including production of materials (newsletters, pamphlets, etc.). 9. Select, manage, and evaluate the administrative personnel required to accomplish the District?s objectives and responsibilities, providing leadership to the Projects Manager as necessary. Administration includes assuring probationary reviews and annual performance reviews are completed on all personnel. 10. Support the Project Managers in the preparation of contracts with funding sources, bid documents, and contracts for contractor services and materials. 11. Maintain and enhance the RCD Board of Directors? working relationships with appropriate officials at the local, county, state, regional, and federal levels to further promote the needs and objectives of the District. 12. Promote the District and successful projects implemented by the District within the community and with the media. Coordinate with the Project Manager in the preparation of any press release promoting District projects and activities. 13. Other duties as assigned by the Board. Qualifications 1. Undergraduate degree in Resource Management, Natural or Applied Science, Public or Business Administration, or equivalent education and experience. Graduate education in any of the aforementioned disciplines is preferred 2. Highly developed experience and knowledge in accessing funding sources, detailed grant writing, budget development, contract creation and interpretation, and grant management requirements 3. Five years progressive experience in administration, planning, budgeting, grant and fiscal management, preferably in the natural resources conservation field 4. Highly developed and demonstrated supervisory management skills for directing individuals and group interaction 5. Ability to interpret and make decisions in accordance with laws, regulations, policies and procedures in the areas of local, state and federal grant funding 6. Excellent verbal and written communication skills: Ability to develop effective and comprehensive reports, correspondence and other written materials -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Tue Aug 23 16:51:08 2011 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 19:51:08 EDT Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune article -- PacifiCorp's Response Message-ID: <1706a.635dca7e.3b8596ec@aol.com> Colleagues.... The Klamath mainstem water quality issues raised by this attached Two Rivers Tribune article has already been thoroughly answered by PacifiCorp's Dean Brockbank, in an OpEd published earlier in the Reddling Record Searchlight on June 27th. That OpEd is attached below for your information. Two observations of my own in addition, however, to bring some much needed perspective to the mis-statements and half truths in the original Two Rivers Tribune article: (1) The 401 Water Quality Certification now pending before the California State Water Resources Control Board is not for dam removal, it is only for a full FERC relicensing of up to 50 years. So why would anyone want to push forward to help PacifiCorp secure one of the last requirements for a full FERC relicensing? Some opponents of the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) (including the Hoopa Valley Tribe, a representative of which is quoted in the article) still strongly believe that if only they can just get the Water Board to flatly deny that 401 Water Quality Certification permit for the full FERC relicensing Application, that this alone will automatically lead to dam removal perhaps faster and easier than under the already agreed to KHSA. Some opposing groups also believe this is the only way to jettison the other half of the Klamath Basin Settlement, which is the 50-year Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) [I will leave aside why this would be itself a bad idea to focus on just dam removal]. This strategy, unfortunately, is a high risk gamble with the fate of the Klamath that might well not pay off. Since no state water agency has EVER just flatly said no to a FERC relicensing application, in the view of those of us who are KHSA proponents, it is far more likely that what would come out of this FERC-required process is a qualified "yes" but with additional mitigation measures that, unfortunately, PacifiCorp just might be able to meet without removing the dams. In other words, as compared to the already signed KHSA, which is moving toward a final decision in March 2012 on four-dam removal targeting 2020, there is -- in KHSA proponents' views -- a much higher risk that moving forward with that 401 Certification would simply open up the way for PacifiCorp to relicense the dams instead of taking them down. And since no dam relicensing 401 Certification has ever been just flatly denied by a state before, proponents of the KHSA dam removal route (including PCFFA) estimate that at best such a denial would just open the process up to delays from many more years of litigation, during which time PacifiCorp would be able to simply continue to run the dams as usual -- without any water quality mitigation measures of any sort -- on routine annual extensions while multiple and serial levels of litigation and all its many appeals is all still pending. Advising Attorneys with considerable experience in such FERC litigation estimate that reliance on this 401 Certification denial route could well delay dam removal -- if it happens at all -- until well after the 2020 removal target date under the already existing KHSA. And even if California flatly denies the 401 Certification for its three dams, and this ruling survives years of litigation, this might well not be the case in Oregon, which has much weaker water quality laws, has only the one dam (J.C. Boyles) with the smallest negative impact on water quality, but that dam is by far the most valuable to PacifiCorp of the four in terms of total power produced. In other words, even forcing the FERC issue might still not result in all the dams coming down, even after many years of litigation, but Oregon's J.C. Boyle could well remain. With a new 50-year licensing, this would mean the next opportunity to obtain the equivalent river restoration as under today's KHSA would not occur until after 2062. To many of us involved in this process, this risky "alternative" FERC route is simply not an acceptable gamble. In short, those groups who signed on to the KHSA (including PCFFA) and are thus diligently pursuing dam removal through the more direct KHSA route believe the risk of the alternative FERC/401 Certification route is far greater than the risk of the KHSA by comparison. This is why we have supported the KHSA and why we oppose the Water Board moving the FERC relicensing Application forward through the 401 Certification process while the KHSA is still being implemented and still has a chance of success. (2) As noted by PacifiCorp's Dean Brockbank in his OpEd below, by trying to sabotage the KHSA and potentially forcing the company back to the regular FERC relicensing route, in addition to reintroducing much more uncertainty about whether four-dam removal will ever finally be achieved, one also loses all the benefits of the KHSA in terms of various "Interim Protective Measures" to help protect water quality and fish in the lower river that the KHSA requires, and which PacifiCorp is now paying several million dollars per year to fund. There is no other legal way to gain the additional protections of such "Interim Measures" except through the KHSA. Aggressive efforts by the Hoopa Valley Tribe to impose such "interim measures" via the FERC process alone have already failed before FERC and lost in the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Efforts by PCFFA to impose similar water quality improvement conditions on PacifiCorp through state court litigation under California's Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act also failed. Detailed descriptions of those Interim Measures can be found in Appendices C & D of the KHSA (available at _www.klamathrestoration.gov_ (http://www.klamathrestoration.gov) ). A copy of PacifiCorp's June 2011 first Annual Report on the KHSA's Implementation is also attached, and will bring you up to date on what the Company has in fact been doing under these KHSA-required measures to improve water quality in the river and to mitigate the impacts of its dams during the "interim period" until the four dams can be removed under the KHSA -- which is still projected for 2020. Reasonable people often disagree, particularly when they try to estimate likely future outcomes of highly uncertain and complex decisional processes. But those who support the KHSA and its companion KBRA have very good reasons -- only some of them outlined above -- for pushing both parts of the Klamath Settlement Agreement forward instead of relying on a flawed FERC process conducted by an agency (FERC) which has never ordered a dam removed against the wishes of its owner in its entire history. A very detailed Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on four-dam removal in the upper Klamath, with estimates of its total costs including mitigation measures, is all due out in late September, 2011 for public review and comments. To get more information on the DEIS preparation process, and to get on the notice list for this and other KHSA-related information, sign up on the notice list available at: _www.klamathrestoration.gov_ (http://www.klamathrestoration.gov) . ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com ========================================================== Dean Brockbank: Klamath Deals Already Producing Results Op-Ed June 27, 2011 Redding Record Searchlight The June 13 "Speak Your Piece" "Water quality suffers as Congress dithers" ignores the facts on the ground and in the water to make several alarming claims of governmental malfeasance and corporate indifference. Fortunately, the dire picture painted by the authors does not exist. In fact, to make their points, the authors simply ignored the many active steps PacifiCorp and other stakeholders are taking right now to implement elements of the landmark Klamath agreements, including actions to improve Klamath River water quality, aquatic habitat and the chances that the fishery will be more abundant. For example, to date PacifiCorp has provided more than $1.5 million to a coho enhancement fund administered in cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries Service and the _California Department of Fish and Game_ (http://www.redding.com/news/topic/california-department-of-fish-and-game/) to support the survival and recovery of coho salmon in the Upper Klamath River basin. Under the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA), PacifiCorp will continue to contribute more than $500,000 annually until the three Klamath dams in California are decommissioned. Measures to enhance tributary cold water flows critical for salmon, keep key coho streams connected to larger tributaries and limit the impact of livestock on river habitat are among many activities directly supported by the fund. In addition to this funding, PacifiCorp is making changes to operations and flow releases to improve conditions for salmon, supporting research on fish disease that will aid in the development of management strategies to combat this problem, and funding improvements to hatchery operations that will benefit coho salmon. Many other activities to improve water quality in the Klamath watershed are well under way and will continue both before and after Congress acts to approve and implement the agreements. These current water-quality improvements include pilot projects and studies of measures to reduce nutrient levels in the river and improve water quality throughout the watershed, which have already begun. If the interior secretary issues an affirmative decision to proceed with dam removal, more than $6 million is committed to fully fund significant water-quality improvements. In coordination with various state and federal agencies and the Karuk and Yurok tribes, parties to the KHSA are now actively monitoring water quality over approximately 250 miles of the Klamath River from the Link River dam in Klamath Falls to the Pacific Ocean. This unique monitoring effort is supported by $500,000 in annual funding from PacifiCorp and will continue each year until the dams are removed. Significant progress is being made on other fronts as well. PacifiCorp has received approval in both California and Oregon to begin collecting surcharges to cover the company's share of dam removal costs in 2020 and has already transferred all of its internal engineering and other operational information to the appropriate federal agencies crafting a detailed plan to remove the dams. Like everyone else, PacifiCorp is waiting for the interior secretary's decision on whether to proceed with dam removal and a full and fair debate in Congress, but a lot has been accomplished since the agreements were signed last year and that work will continue. It is important to remember that the improvements described above are being implemented now as a result of the KHSA and would not be required in the absence of the agreements. This is a testament to the efforts of the involved parties to craft solutions to these complex resource issues that avoid the alternative of continued litigation and the deferral of water quality and habitat improvements that are happening now. #################################################### In a message dated 8/23/2011 12:29:00 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: PacifiCorp Continues to Pollute With Permission _http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/08/pacificorp-continues-to-pollute-wit h-permission/_ (http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/08/pacificorp-continues-to-pollute-with-permission/) Clean Water Act Deteriorates on Klamath River By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune PacifiCorp is on deck to receive yet another abeyance of its California Clean Water section 401 certification today at the State Water Resources Control Board meeting in Sacramento further delaying the power producer?s obligation to reduce its pollution of the Klamath River. Prior to the culmination of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement?two linked deals that compromise permanent water deliveries to agricultural interest for the removal of four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River in California and Oregon?the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had nearly finished its process to re-license the antiquated dams. The final step, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process and the Clean Water Act Section 401 certification, was stalled in 2008 because of a commitment amongst the Interior Secretary, numerous stakeholders, and PacifiCorp to enter into serious negotiations under an Agreement in Principle. Those negotiations were completed in February of 2010 when the Interior Secretary, along with then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, and then Governor Ted Kulongoski of Oregon met in Salem, Ore. to sign the documents. Dozens of stakeholders also signed, including several Klamath River Tribes and environmental groups. Legislation was due to be enacted by May 10, 2010, but it was not, and has not. Although three tribes signed, three did not; The Hoopa Valley Tribe, the Resighini Rancheria and the Quartz Valley Indian Reservation. Also, several environmental groups were either excluded from the negotiations or voluntarily left the table because of their disagreement. There are rumors that Oregon Senator, Jeff Merkley plans to circulate a draft discussion bill in the near future, however, the rumors have not yet been confirmed. The current Water Board resolution proposes to delete all deadlines for enactment of federal legislation. ?This is simple avoidance of the Board?s duty to protect California water quality,? Hoopa Valley Tribal Council member, Hayley Hutt said. ?Stop hoping that the KHSA will do this Board?s work. Instead, they need to complete the CEQA [California Environmental Quality Act] analysis on PacifiCorp?s Section 401 application.? The Hoopa Valley Tribal Environmental Protection Agency (TEPA) regularly tests water quality on the portion of the Klamath River that passes through the Hoopa Reservation. According to TEPA Director, Ken Norton, recent tests confirm what the Tribe suspected?levels of total phosphorous, nitrogen and blue-green algae exceed applicable standards. ?The Water Board?s resolution says to continue the abeyance until the Secretarial Determination (due in March of 2012), but what they do not say is that the Secretary cannot legally make a determination if dam removal is in the best interest of the public until federal legislation is introduced,? Hutt said. Hutt will testify in front of the Water Board today in Sacramento. Although proponents are equally frustrated with the delay in progress to improve Klamath River water quality, they stand by the Settlements they negotiated and signed. Craig Tucker, the Klamath Campaign Coordinator for the Karuk Tribe said that the Karuk Tribe continues to believe that a negotiated settlement is the surest way to dam removal. ?I?ll stand by that until proven otherwise,? he said. Tucker emphasized that the introduction of federal legislation must occur by March, at the latest, and the stall is not due in any part to the parties. ?It hasn?t been for people?s lack of trying and effort,? he said. ?We are now on Congress? clock. We need to get behind it and move it forward.? Sean Stevens from Oregon Wild, a large non-profit environmental group based out of Portland, Ore. said the group has tried to stop the Water Board from giving PacifiCorp a free pass to continue polluting the Klamath River. ?Now that there?s a science report that says it?s unclear if dam removal will reduce pollution in the Klamath River, it?s even more important for the Water Board to address water quality in the Klamath River with or without the Settlements,? Stevens said. ================================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: KHSAImplementationReport-June2011.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 2397438 bytes Desc: not available URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Tue Aug 23 18:49:08 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 18:49:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Found an internship Message-ID: Dear trinity River friends, Just an FYI & not Trinity related. Thank you all who responded to my call for a potential internship. I have now found one, though not through here, but figured I give you an update. It looks like I'll be working with the Mayor of Chico on policy issues dealing with a whole host of things. This is a great opportunity to not only research policy, but to provide recommendations, do public outreach, and be involved in representative government. Some of the issues I'll be working on is sustainability issues, nitrate contamination from septic systems, Central Valley water including issues with the Tuscan Aquifer, redevelopment, improving public involvement and education, and much more. I'm looking forward to this opportunity and feel that it will be a benefit to not only my education, but also help my professional career. So you may just see me around if you have any involvement with Chico government or local water issues here in the north valley. Again, thanks to all of you who responded with potential internships and words of kindness. Sincerely, Joshua Allen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Wed Aug 24 07:15:25 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 07:15:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Found an internship In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110824142057.FGRI29337.txlegofep01.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Wed Aug 24 07:25:06 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 07:25:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Found an internship In-Reply-To: <7.1.0.9.2.20110824064237.03553e10@suddenlink.net> References: <7.1.0.9.2.20110824064237.03553e10@suddenlink.net> Message-ID: <20110824142533.NMMM7268.omta02.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From snowgoose at pulsarco.com Wed Aug 24 09:37:21 2011 From: snowgoose at pulsarco.com (Sandy Denn) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 09:37:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group meetingSept 2011 References: Message-ID: Vina and all; Sandy Denn will be unable to attend this meeting of the TAMWG due to a need to keep a long standing medical appointment that I am unable to change due to a predetermined medicals chedule. ----- Original Message ----- From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov To: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 10:55 AM Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group meetingSept 2011 Hi Folks, The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group is scheduled to meet on September 12, 2011. The discussion topics are listed in the notice. [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 162 (Monday, August 22, 2011)] [Notices] [Pages 52345-52346] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [http://www.gpo.gov/] [FR Doc No: 2011-21333] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2011-N168; 81331-1334-8TWG-W4] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a TAMWG meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG will meet from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Monday, September 12, 2011. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Trinity County Library, 351 Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Randy A. Brown, TAMWG Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River [[Page 52346]] Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Robin Schrock, Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623-1800; e-mail: rschrock at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a meeting of the TAMWG. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: High flow event results, Process and schedule for review of Phase 1 channel rehabilitation projects, FY 2012 TRRP budget and program of work, Roles and responsibilities of Program participants, Hatchery study, Watersheds work program, Public outreach efforts, TRRP science program, Klamath River conditions and possible supplemental water release, Executive Director's report, TMC chair report, and Designated Federal Officer topics. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. Dated: August 16, 2011. Randy A. Brown, Deputy Field Supervisor, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2011-21333 Filed 8-19-11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P Best regards, Vina Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 24 11:24:23 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:24:23 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] 8/16 coho hearing videos available on line References: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F70B8C1C5C54@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> Message-ID: From: "Weseloh, Tom" Date: August 24, 2011 11:20:46 AM PDT To: "Weseloh, Tom" Subject: 8/16 coho hearing videos available on line We have received many requests for links to video recordings of the hearing. The five videos of the hearing are available through the California channel:http://www.calchannel.com/ under ?Recent Videos?. or Part 1: http://www.calchannel.com/channel/viewVideo/2906 Part 2: http://www.calchannel.com/channel/viewvideo/2907 Part 3: http://www.calchannel.com/channel/viewvideo/2930 Part 4: http://www.calchannel.com/channel/viewVideo/2931 Part 5: http://www.calchannel.com/channel/viewVideo/2932 Tom Weseloh Consultant Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture c/o Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro 710 E Street, Suite 150 Eureka, CA 95501 707.445.7014 x10 Tom.weseloh at asm.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 24 12:56:41 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:56:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Trinity River flows to spike for annual Hoopa Tribal ceremonies Message-ID: Trinity River flows to spike for annual Hoopa Tribal ceremonies http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-08-24/Front_Page/Trinity_River_flows_to_spike_for_annual_Hoopa_Trib.html On Sunday, Aug. 28, at approximately 8 a.m., the Bureau of Reclamation will begin to increase releases from Lewiston Dam to the Trinity River for Hoopa Tribal ceremonial purposes. The increased flows in the Trinity River will also meet downstream needs and are based on flow adjustment rates that protect the public and fish and wildlife. The increased releases will raise flows gradually from the summer base flow of 450 cubic feet per second (cfs) to a peak of 2,650 cfs by midnight Sunday. On Tuesday, Aug. 30, at approximately midnight, the flows will begin to be gradually reduced back to 450 cfs by 8 p.m. Thursday, Sept. 1. Recreational river users should exercise extreme caution during the flow increase. Increased flows may pose a danger to swimmers, rafters, fishermen and others. For more information, contact Robin Schrock at the Trinity River Restoration Program Office, 623-1800, or e-mailrschrock at usbr.gov. Six Rivers National Forest officials are reminding forest visitors to be careful while recreating on forest lakes and rivers, especially on the Trinity River as the Bureau of Reclamation is increasing releases from Lewiston Dam into the river for Hoopa Tribal ceremonial purposes beginning Aug. 28. These increased flows will result in higher water levels, swifter currents, colder water and submerged hazards. ?With the upcoming Labor Day weekend, we want people to have fun while recreating on and around the river, but do so in a safe manner,? said Bob Hemus, river safety specialist for the Water Safety Coalition of Northwestern California. ?Since June, at least four people have drowned on local rivers,? Hemus said. ?We cannot bring these lives back, but we can reduce the risk of future drownings by following the safety principles provided below.? Some safety principles to keep in mind: . River currents can be dangerous and may be stronger than they look. If you find yourself caught in a current, float on your back, feet downstream until the current weakens and you can swim to shore. . Jumping or falling into cold water, because of the initial shock and rapid heat loss that follows, is especially dangerous and can lead to hypothermia. . For anglers wearing waders, a belt should be secured around the top of the waders to prevent water from filling up the boots of a person who should accidentally fall or slip into the water or is caught by swift currents. . Wear a life jacket for all river activities. . Keep a close watch on children even if they are far from the water. They can quickly enter the water and get in trouble when your attention is diverted for only a moment. Children should always wear a life jacket when on or around the water. . Don?t go in the water after someone in trouble. Rescue from shore and get help. . High river levels and strong flows can often create new river hazards, such as submerged logs (strainers); boulder movement can also change river hydraulics. . Have a ?designated watcher? with a cell phone or two-way radio. . Know where you are. If help is needed the caller should be able to describe your location; e.g., Bear Campground beach or mile post 1.1 off of road XYZ. . Any time a person comes to a national forest for recreation, it is recommended they inform a responsible person of their location and planned return time. ?I encourage people to contact the nearest Forest Service office closest to where they?ll be recreating to find out the latest river conditions and any other safety information pertinent to their visit,? Hemus said. ?Local river outfitters and guides are also good sources of information concerning river condi- tions since they are on local rivers almost daily.? The Water Safety Coalition of Northwest California also provides more information on water safety at fs.usda.gov/srnf. Dam release schedule Trinity River flows (releases made from Lewiston Dam) will be going up on Aug. 28 for the Hoopa Valley Tribal ceremonies. Releases, in cfs, will be as follows: Date time from to cfs Sunday 8-28 0800 450 550 8-28 1000 550 650 8-28 1200 650 900 8-28 1400 900 1,150 8-28 1600 1,150 1,400 8-28 1800 1,400 1,650 8-28 2000 1,650 1,900 8-28 2200 1,900 2,150 8-28 2400 2,150 2,650 Tuesday 8-30 0001 2,650 2,450 8-30 0400 2,450 2,250 8-30 0800 2,250 2,050 8-30 1200 2,050 1,850 8-30 1600 1,850 1,750 8-30 2000 1,750 1,650 8-30 2400 1,650 1,550 Wednesday 8-31 0400 1,550 1,450 8-31 0800 1,450 1,350 8-31 1200 1,350 1,250 8-31 1600 1,250 1,150 8-31 2000 1,150 1,050 8-31 2400 1,050 950 Thursday 9-01 0400 950 850 9-01 0800 850 750 9-01 1200 750 650 9-01 1600 650 550 9-01 2000 550 450 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 25 08:53:26 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 08:53:26 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Job Available- RIPARIAN ECOLOGIST Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Department Message-ID: <68B6E29F-97C8-4F4F-8988-18CE94C139DF@att.net> RIPARIAN ECOLOGIST Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Department PO Box 417 Hoopa, CA 95546; RESPONSIBILITIES: Provides expertise in riparian ecology and management to the Trinity River Restoration Program (Program)--position is based in Weaverville, CA. Manages the Program?s riparian re-vegetation activities. Assists with the integration of multidisciplinary information aimed at evaluating riparian zone response to restoration actions. Identifies alternatives to resolve conflicting physical and biological management needs. Oversees the work of interagency collaborators; QUALIFICATIONS: Master?s degree in the natural sciences (ecology, biology, botany, plant science, environmental science) with an emphasis on riparian ecology and processes plus two years relevant professional experience; or Bachelor?s degree in the natural sciences plus five years relevant professional experience. Training and experience in restoring riparian vegetation and ecosystem restoration projects is highly desired. CITIZENSHIP: US or Canadian only SALARY: 54,074-$84,245/annum; CLOSING DATE: Open Until Filled CONTACT: For a full job description and application instructions, contact George Kautsky, HVT Fisheries Dept., 800.329.1116 x15 or e-mail hupafish at hoopa-nsn.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Thu Aug 25 09:05:35 2011 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 09:05:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune article -- PacifiCorp's Apologist's Response In-Reply-To: <1706a.635dca7e.3b8596ec@aol.com> References: <1706a.635dca7e.3b8596ec@aol.com> Message-ID: <4E5672CF.2010800@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Thu Aug 25 18:03:49 2011 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 21:03:49 EDT Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune article -- PCFFA response to Tom Schlosser Message-ID: Dear Colleagues..... My good friend and colleague Tom Schlosser, naturally enough as an Attorney for the Hoopa Valley Tribe which opposes the Settlement, has a different -- and far more optimistic -- view of the potential success of an all-FERC and State 401 Certification fight than I do. On these issues, reasonable people do disagree, mostly because we are trying to predict future outcomes of uncertain agency administrative Commissions, Boards and court cases. But as the great Yogi Berra once said, "It is dangerous to make predictions, especially about the future." It is also unwise for any Attorney to have total faith in their theory of a case succeeding in litigation.... sometimes it fails, and it is wise to have a backup plan. Tom Schlosser simply has far more confidence in those Commissions/Boards and Courts all making the decisions we want than I do. I and the other Parties to the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA), many of whom are also experienced litigation and administrative agency Attorney's themselves (as am I), simply have far less confidence in the backbone of the California Water Resources Control Board, and even less confidence in the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission (EQC), to "just say no" and to then fight through years of litigation to make it stick in courts through all the state, and then federal, rounds of appeals, than do advocates of scrapping the KHSA and going it alone through the FERC process. Each factual determination and each condition imposed by either of these two state Commissions/Boards in any 401 Certification (or denied as PacifiCorp proposed alternatives in decertification) will be subject to litigation. No state agency has ever yet succeeded in making a complete 401 Certification denial stick. And FERC has never yet, in its entire history, ordered a dam down against the wishes of a license Applicant -- EXCEPT pursuant to a Settlement Agreement such as the KHSA. And to win in litigation one would have to ultimately prevail on all key issues, every time. One major loss on any key issue could be fatal. Since we simply do not know what preconditions might be imposed on a 401 Certification, or what the result of litigation over those preconditions might be, it is quite premature to say that PacifiCorp simply cannot meet them.... and they have multiple backup plans to face those contingencies if they have to. What if they can meet them? What then? Then they get a 50-year FERC licensing and the next time this opportunity comes up will be at least 2062. This is a risk of that FERC-only route Tom completely ignores. And my point about PacifiCorp likely walking away with J.C. Boyle dam in any nes FERC license, which produces 55% of the power of the entire system, but has the least water quality impact and sits in the state with the weakest water quality laws, is unfortunately a realistic potential outcome of such a FERC-only route in Oregon. The PUC approvals for collection of the Klamath Surcharge, was not -- as mistakenly portrayed by Tom -- a decision comparing dam removal under FERC to relicensing also under FERC. It was a decision based on the KHSA, i.e., approving the KHSA (with its $200 million "customer cap" on ratepayer costs of dam removal), to full FERC relicensing. There is no question that PacifiCorp's ratepayers' responsibilities under the KHSA are less than under full FERC relicensing. However, if one compares the full costs of dam removal under FERC alone (i.e. without the KHSA) with dam relicensing under FERC alone, they come much closer to a wash -- and therefore much closer, absent the KHSA and its liability protections for PacifiCorp's customers, to something that PacifiCorp could realistically choose as the best financial option of those two. Don't be too certain which way this would go. And two final rebuttal points: (1) Yes, the companion Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) will require long-term management and funding, which means an annual Congressional funding fight. But so what? This is always the case with any federally funded restoration project. Much of the KBRA, however, does not need special federal legislation to proceed, and is written into the President's Budget already, some of it being funded already. But of course, it will always be a struggle to get any particular sums of appropriations through Congress. Is this an excuse for not trying? I would say not. Dam removal itself, however, does NOT require any federal funding and, after passage of implementing legislation, will occur under the KHSA without any other approvals by Congress. Many people are working to smooth that Congressional passage route in many ways. There is also already more than $20 million in the Klamath Surcharge fund now, and this is increasing monthly, on target toward the $200 million in funding due by 2020. But in our view -- and the view of most Klamath salmon biologists -- there is no way to achieve substantial recovery of salmon in the Klamath through dam removal alone. This is why the KBRA provides for more water -- up to 230,000 acre-feet more water each year -- to be returned back to the river for fish as part of the deal. (2) Of course there will be litigation over any dam removal decisions. There already has been, though none of it has succeeded to date. This type of litigation delay is already built into the KHSA dam removal schedule and why it will likely take nine more years to get these dams down. PacifiCorp's Condit Dam, which comes down this fall, took about 11 years I believe, so this timeline is realistic. (3) Tom is correct that the NMFS Biological Opinion, and the Interim Conservation Plan that came out of PacifiCorp's response to that BiOp, provide some minimal stand-alone "interim measures," but those are already incorporated into the KHSA, at Appendix C. They are not all that impressive, frankly, and only sufficient to prevent ESA "jeopardy," nothing more, but his is correct that they might survive a KHSA failure. In addition, however, as part of the negotiations the KHSA at Appendix D contains many more "interim measures" than required under the NMFS BiOp. Lose the KHSA and all those additional protective measures will indeed be lost, so my point remains much the same. Looking to the NMFS BiOp or Interim Conservation Plan to provide additional protections is redundant. Those "imterim measures" are already being implemented -- as an integral part of the KHSA. SUMMARY: On the basis of our analysis of all the above issues, and the difficulties inherent in a FERC-only/401 non-Certification litigation route to achieve four-dam removal unilaterally and against PacifiCorp's wishes, the "bird in the hand" of the already signed Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) -- with all its interim protective measures in full play in the interim -- appears far superior, far faster, far less risky, far more protective of the river, and far more certain to result in four-dam removal by 2020 than the "two birds in the bush" strategy of seeking, hopefully getting, and then valiantly and successfully defending through years of litigation a still hypothetical denial of 401 Certification by both the two states, during which PacifiCorp only has to continue business as usual under the current FERC license. Hence those supporting the KHSA see the KHSA as our first and best option to achieve full four-dam removal as soon as feasible with as much certainty as possible, with at least some river protections in place in the mean time. This is why we are diligently pursuing it now. Unfortunately, it is the "FERC-only route" which Tom presents, with all its inherent risks and increased uncertainties, no "interim measures" to speak of (except perhaps the barest minimums required by a NMFS BiOp), and the real possibility that it will not actually achieve four-dam removal, or that litigation delays will push that removal well past 2020 anyway, that is the "back up plan," if the KHSA should fail -- not our first option. I respect Tom Schlosser as a friend and colleague. But those groups that support the KHSA simply come to a different conclusion than he does, given the facts, risks and uncertainties above. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com In a message dated 8/25/2011 9:09:57 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, t.schlosser at msaj.com writes: It is depressing enough to have a Director of PCFFA defending PacifiCorp?s terrible water quality management on the Klamath, but the errors in Mr. Spain?s apology below are glaring. (1) Spain confuses the Section 401 water quality certification with PacifiCorp?s application for a certification. It is true that PacifiCorp seeks certification for a new license like the 1956 license, which they dream should be without fish passage. The State Water Resources Control Board CEQA EIR, however, will consider several alternatives, including dam removals, in developing conditions for a certification. The SWRCB is not limited to granting or denying exactly what PacifiCorp hopes for; instead, the Board can impose conditions. Spain?s purported fear that PacifiCorp could comply with all the conditions without removing the dams is unjustified, in part for the reasons described in the Op-Ed published by PacifiCorp?s Dean Brockbank, which Spain attached. As Brockbank notes ?PacifiCorp has received approval in both California and Oregon to begin collecting surcharges to cover the company?s share of dam removal costs in 2020.? PacifiCorp achieved that approval by proving to the utility commissions that dam removal is cheaper than retrofitting the dams to provide the full volitional upstream and downstream fish passage which is already mandated by federal licensing conditions. Conditions that may be imposed by the State Water Resources Control Board will only further tilt the cost savings in favor of dam removal. These dams are history. Spain projects that litigation will delay dam removal when FERC issues a license that will make it cheaper for PacifiCorp to remove the dams than to comply with conditions. But there is no guarantee that there will be no litigation concerning the KHSA and KBRA and the flawed NEPA process currently under way. Anyone can sue. Plus, Spain neglects to mention the $1 billion albatross hanging around the neck of the KHSA--the need for federal legislation and appropriations. We don't think Congress will jump to pass the legislation required by the KHSA, and this could delay that process indefinitely.. By contrast, no new legislation is needed for a FERC license that leads to dam removal. Finally, Spain claims there is no legal way to gain the additional protections of the interim measures except through the KHSA. Again, he overlooks the Biological Opinion issued by National Marine Fisheries Service for the protection of Coho salmon, and the Interim Conservation Plan that NMFS negotiated with PacifiCorp to avoid liability under the Endangered Species Act. It is, in fact, those documents not the KHSA that have produced most of the operational changes seen thus far. Tom On 8/23/2011 4:51 PM, _FISH1IFR at aol.com_ (mailto:FISH1IFR at aol.com) wrote: Colleagues.... The Klamath mainstem water quality issues raised by this attached Two Rivers Tribune article has already been thoroughly answered by PacifiCorp's Dean Brockbank, in an OpEd published earlier in the Reddling Record Searchlight on June 27th. That OpEd is attached below for your information. Two observations of my own in addition, however, to bring some much needed perspective to the mis-statements and half truths in the original Two Rivers Tribune article: (1) The 401 Water Quality Certification now pending before the California State Water Resources Control Board is not for dam removal, it is only for a full FERC relicensing of up to 50 years. So why would anyone want to push forward to help PacifiCorp secure one of the last requirements for a full FERC relicensing? Some opponents of the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) (including the Hoopa Valley Tribe, a representative of which is quoted in the article) still strongly believe that if only they can just get the Water Board to flatly deny that 401 Water Quality Certification permit for the full FERC relicensing Application, that this alone will automatically lead to dam removal perhaps faster and easier than under the already agreed to KHSA. Some opposing groups also believe this is the only way to jettison the other half of the Klamath Basin Settlement, which is the 50-year Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) [I will leave aside why this would be itself a bad idea to focus on just dam removal]. This strategy, unfortunately, is a high risk gamble with the fate of the Klamath that might well not pay off. Since no state water agency has EVER just flatly said no to a FERC relicensing application, in the view of those of us who are KHSA proponents, it is far more likely that what would come out of this FERC-required process is a qualified "yes" but with additional mitigation measures that, unfortunately, PacifiCorp just might be able to meet without removing the dams. In other words, as compared to the already signed KHSA, which is moving toward a final decision in March 2012 on four-dam removal targeting 2020, there is -- in KHSA proponents' views -- a much higher risk that moving forward with that 401 Certification would simply open up the way for PacifiCorp to relicense the dams instead of taking them down. And since no dam relicensing 401 Certification has ever been just flatly denied by a state before, proponents of the KHSA dam removal route (including PCFFA) estimate that at best such a denial would just open the process up to delays from many more years of litigation, during which time PacifiCorp would be able to simply continue to run the dams as usual -- without any water quality mitigation measures of any sort -- on routine annual extensions while multiple and serial levels of litigation and all its many appeals is all still pending. Advising Attorneys with considerable experience in such FERC litigation estimate that reliance on this 401 Certification denial route could well delay dam removal -- if it happens at all -- until well after the 2020 removal target date under the already existing KHSA. And even if California flatly denies the 401 Certification for its three dams, and this ruling survives years of litigation, this might well not be the case in Oregon, which has much weaker water quality laws, has only the one dam (J.C. Boyles) with the smallest negative impact on water quality, but that dam is by far the most valuable to PacifiCorp of the four in terms of total power produced. In other words, even forcing the FERC issue might still not result in all the dams coming down, even after many years of litigation, but Oregon's J.C. Boyle could well remain. With a new 50-year licensing, this would mean the next opportunity to obtain the equivalent river restoration as under today's KHSA would not occur until after 2062. To many of us involved in this process, this risky "alternative" FERC route is simply not an acceptable gamble. In short, those groups who signed on to the KHSA (including PCFFA) and are thus diligently pursuing dam removal through the more direct KHSA route believe the risk of the alternative FERC/401 Certification route is far greater than the risk of the KHSA by comparison. This is why we have supported the KHSA and why we oppose the Water Board moving the FERC relicensing Application forward through the 401 Certification process while the KHSA is still being implemented and still has a chance of success. (2) As noted by PacifiCorp's Dean Brockbank in his OpEd below, by trying to sabotage the KHSA and potentially forcing the company back to the regular FERC relicensing route, in addition to reintroducing much more uncertainty about whether four-dam removal will ever finally be achieved, one also loses all the benefits of the KHSA in terms of various "Interim Protective Measures" to help protect water quality and fish in the lower river that the KHSA requires, and which PacifiCorp is now paying several million dollars per year to fund. There is no other legal way to gain the additional protections of such "Interim Measures" except through the KHSA. Aggressive efforts by the Hoopa Valley Tribe to impose such "interim measures" via the FERC process alone have already failed before FERC and lost in the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Efforts by PCFFA to impose similar water quality improvement conditions on PacifiCorp through state court litigation under California's Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act also failed. Detailed descriptions of those Interim Measures can be found in Appendices C & D of the KHSA (available at _www.klamathrestoration.gov_ (http://www.klamathrestoration.gov/) ). A copy of PacifiCorp's June 2011 first Annual Report on the KHSA's Implementation is also attached, and will bring you up to date on what the Company has in fact been doing under these KHSA-required measures to improve water quality in the river and to mitigate the impacts of its dams during the "interim period" until the four dams can be removed under the KHSA -- which is still projected for 2020. Reasonable people often disagree, particularly when they try to estimate likely future outcomes of highly uncertain and complex decisional processes. But those who support the KHSA and its companion KBRA have very good reasons -- only some of them outlined above -- for pushing both parts of the Klamath Settlement Agreement forward instead of relying on a flawed FERC process conducted by an agency (FERC) which has never ordered a dam removed against the wishes of its owner in its entire history. A very detailed Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on four-dam removal in the upper Klamath, with estimates of its total costs including mitigation measures, is all due out in late September, 2011 for public review and comments. To get more information on the DEIS preparation process, and to get on the notice list for this and other KHSA-related information, sign up on the notice list available at: _www.klamathrestoration.gov_ (http://www.klamathrestoration.gov/) . ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: _fish1ifr at aol.com_ (mailto:fish1ifr at aol.com) ========================================================== Dean Brockbank: Klamath Deals Already Producing Results Op-Ed June 27, 2011 Redding Record Searchlight The June 13 "Speak Your Piece" "Water quality suffers as Congress dithers" ignores the facts on the ground and in the water to make several alarming claims of governmental malfeasance and corporate indifference. Fortunately, the dire picture painted by the authors does not exist. In fact, to make their points, the authors simply ignored the many active steps PacifiCorp and other stakeholders are taking right now to implement elements of the landmark Klamath agreements, including actions to improve Klamath River water quality, aquatic habitat and the chances that the fishery will be more abundant. For example, to date PacifiCorp has provided more than $1.5 million to a coho enhancement fund administered in cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries Service and the _California Department of Fish and Game_ (http://www.redding.com/news/topic/california-department-of-fish-and-game/) to support the survival and recovery of coho salmon in the Upper Klamath River basin. Under the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA), PacifiCorp will continue to contribute more than $500,000 annually until the three Klamath dams in California are decommissioned. Measures to enhance tributary cold water flows critical for salmon, keep key coho streams connected to larger tributaries and limit the impact of livestock on river habitat are among many activities directly supported by the fund. In addition to this funding, PacifiCorp is making changes to operations and flow releases to improve conditions for salmon, supporting research on fish disease that will aid in the development of management strategies to combat this problem, and funding improvements to hatchery operations that will benefit coho salmon. Many other activities to improve water quality in the Klamath watershed are well under way and will continue both before and after Congress acts to approve and implement the agreements. These current water-quality improvements include pilot projects and studies of measures to reduce nutrient levels in the river and improve water quality throughout the watershed, which have already begun. If the interior secretary issues an affirmative decision to proceed with dam removal, more than $6 million is committed to fully fund significant water-quality improvements. In coordination with various state and federal agencies and the Karuk and Yurok tribes, parties to the KHSA are now actively monitoring water quality over approximately 250 miles of the Klamath River from the Link River dam in Klamath Falls to the Pacific Ocean. This unique monitoring effort is supported by $500,000 in annual funding from PacifiCorp and will continue each year until the dams are removed. Significant progress is being made on other fronts as well. PacifiCorp has received approval in both California and Oregon to begin collecting surcharges to cover the company's share of dam removal costs in 2020 and has already transferred all of its internal engineering and other operational information to the appropriate federal agencies crafting a detailed plan to remove the dams. Like everyone else, PacifiCorp is waiting for the interior secretary's decision on whether to proceed with dam removal and a full and fair debate in Congress, but a lot has been accomplished since the agreements were signed last year and that work will continue. It is important to remember that the improvements described above are being implemented now as a result of the KHSA and would not be required in the absence of the agreements. This is a testament to the efforts of the involved parties to craft solutions to these complex resource issues that avoid the alternative of continued litigation and the deferral of water quality and habitat improvements that are happening now. #################################################### In a message dated 8/23/2011 12:29:00 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, _tstokely at att.net_ (mailto:tstokely at att.net) writes: PacifiCorp Continues to Pollute With Permission _http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/08/pacificorp-continues-to-pollute-wit h-permission/_ (http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/08/pacificorp-continues-to-pollute-with-permission/) Clean Water Act Deteriorates on Klamath River By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune PacifiCorp is on deck to receive yet another abeyance of its California Clean Water section 401 certification today at the State Water Resources Control Board meeting in Sacramento further delaying the power producer?s obligation to reduce its pollution of the Klamath River. Prior to the culmination of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement?two linked deals that compromise permanent water deliveries to agricultural interest for the removal of four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River in California and Oregon?the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had nearly finished its process to re-license the antiquated dams. The final step, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process and the Clean Water Act Section 401 certification, was stalled in 2008 because of a commitment amongst the Interior Secretary, numerous stakeholders, and PacifiCorp to enter into serious negotiations under an Agreement in Principle. Those negotiations were completed in February of 2010 when the Interior Secretary, along with then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, and then Governor Ted Kulongoski of Oregon met in Salem, Ore. to sign the documents. Dozens of stakeholders also signed, including several Klamath River Tribes and environmental groups. Legislation was due to be enacted by May 10, 2010, but it was not, and has not. Although three tribes signed, three did not; The Hoopa Valley Tribe, the Resighini Rancheria and the Quartz Valley Indian Reservation. Also, several environmental groups were either excluded from the negotiations or voluntarily left the table because of their disagreement. There are rumors that Oregon Senator, Jeff Merkley plans to circulate a draft discussion bill in the near future, however, the rumors have not yet been confirmed. The current Water Board resolution proposes to delete all deadlines for enactment of federal legislation. ?This is simple avoidance of the Board?s duty to protect California water quality,? Hoopa Valley Tribal Council member, Hayley Hutt said. ?Stop hoping that the KHSA will do this Board?s work. Instead, they need to complete the CEQA [California Environmental Quality Act] analysis on PacifiCorp?s Section 401 application.? The Hoopa Valley Tribal Environmental Protection Agency (TEPA) regularly tests water quality on the portion of the Klamath River that passes through the Hoopa Reservation. According to TEPA Director, Ken Norton, recent tests confirm what the Tribe suspected?levels of total phosphorous, nitrogen and blue-green algae exceed applicable standards. ?The Water Board?s resolution says to continue the abeyance until the Secretarial Determination (due in March of 2012), but what they do not say is that the Secretary cannot legally make a determination if dam removal is in the best interest of the public until federal legislation is introduced,? Hutt said. Hutt will testify in front of the Water Board today in Sacramento. Although proponents are equally frustrated with the delay in progress to improve Klamath River water quality, they stand by the Settlements they negotiated and signed. Craig Tucker, the Klamath Campaign Coordinator for the Karuk Tribe said that the Karuk Tribe continues to believe that a negotiated settlement is the surest way to dam removal. ?I?ll stand by that until proven otherwise,? he said. Tucker emphasized that the introduction of federal legislation must occur by March, at the latest, and the stall is not due in any part to the parties. ?It hasn?t been for people?s lack of trying and effort,? he said. ?We are now on Congress? clock. We need to get behind it and move it forward.? Sean Stevens from Oregon Wild, a large non-profit environmental group based out of Portland, Ore. said the group has tried to stop the Water Board from giving PacifiCorp a free pass to continue polluting the Klamath River. ?Now that there?s a science report that says it?s unclear if dam removal will reduce pollution in the Klamath River, it?s even more important for the Water Board to address water quality in the Klamath River with or without the Settlements,? Stevens said. ================================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Aug 27 17:03:10 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 17:03:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Brown appoints Chuck Bonham as new DFG Director Message-ID: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/08/26/18688822.php Brown appoints Chuck Bonham as new DFG Director by Dan Bacher Friday Aug 26th, 2011 3:52 PM ?I have known and worked with Bonham for a number of years,? said Dick Pool, administrator of http://www.water4fish.org and Secretary/Treasurer of the Golden Gate Salmon Association (GGSA). ?I have great respect for his capabilities and dedication to fishery issues. We look forward to working with him." Brown appoints Chuck Bonham as new DFG Director By Dan Bacher Governor Jerry Brown has appointed Charlton ?Chuck? Bonham, 43, of Albany, as director of the California Department of Fish and Game Bonham has served in multiple positions at Trout Unlimited, a national trout advocacy organization, since 2000, including California director and senior attorney, according to a August 26 news release from Governor Jerry Brown's Office. He was an instructor and trip leader for the Nantahala Outdoor Center from 1994 to 1997 and was a small business development agent for the United States Peace Corp in Senegal, West Africa from 1991 to 1993. Bonham was not available for comment at press time, but representatives of recreational and commercial fishing groups praised his appointment by Brown. "I think he's a good choice," said Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen?s Associations (PCFFA). "I hope that he's able to resolve the funding issues that plague the Department of Fish and Game. How can you run a department when there is no money for research and enforcement? Grader has worked with Bonham on Klamath River dam removal and hydroelectric relicensing. ?We both appeared before Public Utility Commission to testify regarding permits needed for dam removal,? said Grader. He said he believes that Bonham is somebody that both recreational and commercial fishermen ?can work with.? ?I have known and worked with Chuck for a number of years,? said Dick Pool, administrator of http://www.water4fish.org and Secretary/Treasurer of the Golden Gate Salmon Association (GGSA). ?I have great respect for his capabilities and dedication to fishery issues. We look forward to working with him." Troy Fletcher, acting Executive Director of the Yurok Tribe, also was pleased with Bonham's appointment. "I've worked closely with Chuck for years," said Fletcher. "He's been very instrumental in working on Klamath River dam removal and other agreements. I've enjoyed working with Chuck as a person and a professional. I think he'll make a good fit and the Yurok Tribe looks forward to working with him in his new role." Bonham has a number of controversial issues to deal with in his new position, lead by the deaths of millions of Sacramento splittail and hundreds of thousands of other fish species at the Delta pumps this year because of record water exports out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Other controversial issues Bonham will have to address include the privately-funded Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative, the campaign by the state and federal governments to build a peripheral canal, and the massive dewatering of the Scott and Shasta rivers every year by irrigators. This position requires Senate confirmation and the compensation is $150,112. Bonham is a Democrat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Tue Aug 30 12:07:24 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 12:07:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Call for research interviewees concerning the Brown Act Message-ID: Hi All, I'm beginning my research into the CA Brown Act, otherwise known as the California Open Meeting Law, for my graduate research into public administrative policy. As such, I am looking for potential people involved in CA politics and policy who have a perspective on this law. Particularly I am interested in hearing from administrators and decision makers in federal, state, local, and tribal government, as well as NGOs, lawyers, and journalists; which I know there are many of you on this list-serve. The information I gleam from you will help to develop a thesis for my professional paper for my degree, as well as hopefully provide some direction for research, and potential policy recommendations. I am in the process of developing a questionnaire at this time. If you are interested, please feel free to contact me, so we can set up an interview, and send you a release form for research involving human subjects (a CSU Chico requirement). Thank you for your time! Joshua Allen 2012 Master of Public Administration Candidate -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From acaswr at yahoo.com Wed Aug 31 08:47:11 2011 From: acaswr at yahoo.com (lou jacobson) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 08:47:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Redwood Coast Energy Authority: Fall Intern Position Announcements In-Reply-To: <000001cc67f3$43931bd0$cab95370$@org> References: <000001cc67f3$43931bd0$cab95370$@org> Message-ID: <1314805631.45028.YahooMailNeo@web120215.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Redwood Coast Energy Authority (RCEA) is currently accepting applicants for the following fall intern positions: ? Residential Installation Interns (3 positions) Office Support Intern (1 position) Humboldt County Green Communities Interns (approx 3 positions) ? The Redwood Coast Energy Authority (RCEA) is a Joint Powers Authority whose members include the County of Humboldt; the cities of Arcata, Blue Lake, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, Rio Dell, and Trinidad; and the Humboldt Bay Municipal water District.RCEA?s mission is to develop and implement sustainable initiatives that reduce energy demand, increase energy efficiency, and advance the use of clean, efficient and renewable resources available in the region. ? ?If you know anyone who would be interested in these opportunities please forward the position announcements. Thanks a bunch and keep up the good work! Lou Jacobson Energy Specialist Redwood Coast Energy Authority ljacobson at redwoodenergy.org 707.269.1700 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Position Announcement - RESDI Installation Intern- 8-17-11.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 92615 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Position Announcement - RESDI Office Intern- 8-17-11.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 93055 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Position Announcement- Green Communities GHG Inventories Internship.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 84267 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Sep 1 09:14:11 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 09:14:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] [SPAM?] Judge Wanger set to retire, Fresno Bee, 8.31.2011 References: Message-ID: http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/08/31/2520174/federal-judge-who-handled-smelt.html Wanger to retire after 2 decades on federal bench Posted at 10:10 PM on Wednesday, Aug. 31, 2011 By John Ellis / The Fresno Bee Oliver W. Wanger, the often larger-than-life federal judge who has presided over some of this region's most high-profile cases, is stepping down after two decades. Wanger, 70, is taking the rare step of leaving the bench and returning to private practice. His last day at Fresno's federal courthouse is Sept. 30, a Friday. The following Monday, he'll hang out his shingle as a partner at the newly created firm of Wanger Jones Helsley. "I am going to be a lawyer," Wanger said. "I'm going back to the other side of the bench." Wanger said he's frustrated by the Fresno court's growing caseload and Congress's unwillingness to add judges here. Wanger ? who sent his resignation letter Wednesday to Anthony W. Ishii, the chief judge for California's eastern federal judicial district ? plans to be much more than a trial lawyer. The notorious workaholic still plans to offer his services as a defense attorney, but he also plans to teach, advise trial lawyers and local governments, and be an expert witness. He also will hear civil cases as a private judge. And he no longer expects to be addressed as "Judge Wanger." Instead, he'll once again be "Ollie Wanger." Wanger's resignation letter says his "intent was lifetime service." Five years ago, he took "senior status," a change that could allow him to move into semiretirement, reduce his caseload and keep his existing salary. The move also allowed Congress to appoint someone to fill his former slot as a full-time jurist. But instead of moving into semiretirement, he kept his entire caseload. And as his caseload grew even more, he became increasingly frustrated that Congress wouldn't create more judgeships. On Wednesday, he also hinted that compensation is an issue, though he added he was "not complaining in light of what everybody else in our society is going through." District court judges, who have lifetime appointments, earn $174,000 annually. But Wanger said raises have been nonexistent and cost-of-living adjustments have been sparing. Wanger's departure will be felt at Fresno's federal courthouse, observers say. "It's a huge loss of institutional knowledge ? and also the loss of his work ethic," said Carl Faller, a local defense attorney who formerly worked as a federal prosecutor. "I think it will be very tough on the judges that remain to pick up the slack for someone who has been a massive part of that bench for so many years." Wanger, for instance, has been the main judge overseeing the ongoing Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta water wars between farmers and other water users and environmentalists. In the middle are the delta smelt and endangered salmon ? as well as reams of complicated state and federal water law. Ishii said Wanger "was unmatched in his passion for justice, fairness and upholding the rule of law." Then there's the caseload. Wanger's 1,200 cases will have to be split between Lawrence J. O'Neill and Ishii, who are Fresno's two remaining judges. Two decades of service Wanger, a Republican, was nominated in 1991 by then-President George H.W. Bush and confirmed unanimously by the Senate. A native of Los Angeles, Wanger earned a law degree at the University of California at Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law. In 1967, he came to Fresno as a deputy district attorney. He eventually left for private practice. When he was nominated to the federal bench, he was a partner at McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth, one of the city's most prominent law firms. As a judge, Wanger has overseen some of Fresno's most celebrated cases, including the Operation Rezone political corruption cases in the 1990s and, more recently, a lawsuit brought by nine homeless residents in Fresno who said the city destroyed their personal property without giving them a chance to reclaim the items. Wanger ruled in favor of the homeless. A battle of wills It was the latter case that helped spark a public feud between Wanger and then-Fresno Mayor Alan Autry, who said the judge should "enter the real world and find out the real truth." At one point, Wanger ordered Autry into his court, saying the mayor had challenged "the integrity of the United States Court." Wanger has sometimes gone to great lengths to explain decisions and the law behind them. He appeared before farmers ? some of them hostile over his smelt and salmon decisions ? to explain water law at a Madera County Farm Bureau meeting. "He is a natural teacher and a tireless worker with the goal of justice always at the forefront of everything he has ever touched," said O'Neill. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Thu Sep 1 16:21:35 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 16:21:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] [SPAM?] Re: [SPAM?] Judge Wanger set to retire, Fresno Bee, 8.31.2011 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110901232139.WOJZ12186.omta01.suddenlink.net@kier.suddenlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Sep 2 08:40:45 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 08:40:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG agenda for September 12 References: Message-ID: <95EC8836-E2FA-4D48-B0CE-F91F739B88EB@att.net> From: "Arnold Whitridge" Date: September 2, 2011 6:51:59 AM PDT To: "\"Dana Hord\"" , "\"David Steinhauser\"" , "Kelli Gant - tds" , "\"Edgar Duggan\"" , "Elizabeth Hadley" , , , "Jeff Sutton" , , "Rich Lorenz" , "Sandy Denn" , "Joseph McCarthy" , "Spreck Rosekrans" Cc: "Tom Stokely" Subject: TAMWG agenda for September 12 Here's the agenda for our rapidly-approaching September 12 TAMWG meeting. Looking forward, Arnold Proposed Agenda TRINITY ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP Monday, September 12, 2011 Trinity County Library, Weaverville, CA Time Presentation, Discussion, and/or Action on: Presenter 1. 10:00 Adopt agenda; approve minutes from May and June 2. 10:10 Open forum; public comment 3. 10:20 TMC Chair report Brian Person 4. 11:00 Further observations of effects of peak releases; Andreas Krause planned flow reporting 5. 11:30 Draft System Status Report Nina Hemphill 12:30 lunch 6. 1:30 Channel rehabilitation program: Phase 1 review Ernie Clarke 2012 projects D.J. Bandrowski 7. 2:30 Science program; reviews; Big Guiding Questions Ernie Clarke 8. 3:30 Watersheds work program Dave Gaeuman 9. 4:00 Executive Director?s report Robin Schrock 10. 4:30 Designated Federal Officer topics Randy Brown 11. 4:45 Tentative date and agenda topics for next regular meeting 5:00 Adjourn Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Draft TAMWG Agenda September 2011.doc Type: application/msword Size: 33792 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Sep 2 10:44:06 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 10:44:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Hoopa letter on FY 2012 TRRP budget References: Message-ID: <403D1E1F-AC54-4087-B7C2-2BB0B8F7C2FE@att.net> Attached is a letter from the Hoopa Valley Tribe recommending major changes in the TRRP 2012 budget, including a cut in watershed restoration from $1 million to $250,000 in order to fund additional studies and existing channel project re-designs. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Hoopa Design Team RIG Budget Input 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 130493 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Sep 3 07:37:17 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 07:37:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fresno Bee- Water divides Central Valley lawmakers Message-ID: <6E233B3F-F5B1-4D55-B9C0-4092FF4A10AF@att.net> http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/09/02/2523213/water-divides-central-valley-lawmakers.html Water divides Central Valley lawmakers Bill splits Sacramento, San Joaquin valleys. Posted at 11:49 PM on Friday, Sep. 02, 2011 By Michael Doyle / Bee Washington Bureau WASHINGTON -- The year's boldest California water bill picked one fight but found another. Naturally, legislation stopping San Joaquin River restoration pits farmers against environmentalists. The more surprising conflict, and the one that so far has stymied lawmakers, pits the Sacramento Valley against the San Joaquin Valley, farmer against farmer and Republican against Republican. "What's happening," said Rep. John Garamendi, D-Walnut Grove, "is the early stages of a new water war." Behind the scenes, Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley negotiators have struggled all summer to resolve their differences. There's no truce yet, even as Congress returns to work on Tuesday. "When you start doing a big water bill like this, it's complex," said Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia. "There are a lot of moving parts, and it's a work in progress." Joined by Republican Reps. Jeff Denham of Atwater and Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, Nunes in May introduced the bill he dubbed the "San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act." In myriad ways, the 38-page bill sought to ensure more water deliveries to farmers south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The bill repeals an ambitious program, approved by Congress in 2009, to restore water and salmon to the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam. It returns federal irrigation contracts to 40 years instead of 25, and guarantees their renewal. It pre-empts strict state environmental laws. The bill also presents a test for Republican Rep. Tom McClintock of Elk Grove. McClintock formerly represented a Southern California state Senate district. Now, representing northeastern California, he serves a different water basin even as he shoulders statewide responsibilities as chairman of the House water and power subcommittee. McClintock praised the bill at its initial June 2 hearing, but then joined Rep. Wally Herger, R-Chico, in raising concerns about the potential impact on Northern California water rights. Nunes now says his "hope" is that the California water negotiations may be successfully concluded and the bill ready for action "in the next couple of months." Garamendi said that the bill "is not going to happen," by which he means pass both the House and Senate. The negotiations have settled some differences, but not the most important ones. In particular, some San Joaquin Valley farmers still want the bill to pre-empt state laws to ensure California doesn't restrict irrigation deliveries south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Sacramento Valley farmers fear this would end up threatening their own supplies. "Our goal is never to upset anybody's water rights," Nunes said, adding that "we're working on a number of things that will benefit Sacramento Valley farmers." Nunes said he also is working on a separate water bill, which he might try attaching to a big deficit-reduction package. The new bill would include raising water revenues from Bay Area residents, Nunes said. Substantively, the bill that's already been introduced reverses environmental protections that, combined with drought, have cut federal irrigation deliveries in recent years. Irrigators on the San Joaquin Valley's west side received 50% of their allocation last year and 10% in 2009. This year, thanks to a wet winter, the farmers are getting 80%. Politically, the bill jams any Democrat who needs Valley farm votes. "As usual, anything they can do to worship at the altar of the radical environmentalists, they will do it," Nunes said of Democrats, adding that Sen. Dianne Feinstein "has a two-decade record of destroying the Valley." Feinstein denounces Nunes for his consistently combative rhetoric, and even some of the congressman's allies believe it might undermine his long-term effectiveness. Senate rules give Feinstein particular clout in stopping legislation that affects California that she doesn't like; in particular, as author of the original San Joaquin River restoration program, Feinstein strongly opposes repeal efforts. On other water issues, though, Feinstein and her staff have been in protracted discussions with key California interests. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 10:54:54 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 10:54:54 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] 2011 California Indian Conference planned at Chico State University Message-ID: *2011 California Indian Conference planned at Chico State University* *http://www.chicoer.com/rss/ci_18833405?source=rss* The 2011 annual California Indian Conference will be held Oct. 27-30 at Chico State University. The theme of this year's conference is "Sustaining the Circle of Knowledge." There will be a wide diversity of presentations, workshops and performances, along with a number of special events. These include a basketry exhibit and master weavers demonstration, a fine-arts display and an opportunity to tour the California State Indian Museum in Sacramento. For more information, contact Amy Huberland at ahuberland at csuchico.edu or 898-5438. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Thu Sep 8 14:13:55 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 14:13:55 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawn survey season starts now! Message-ID: Trinity River enthusiasts, The 2011 Trinity River Chinook salmon spawning season is upon us! The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, the Yurok Tribe, Hoopa Valley Tribe, and U.S. Forest Service will have crews out on the mainstem Trinity River on a weekly basis from now to December (and in select tribs too in the case of the U.S. Forest Service). We surveyed the river yesterday September 7 from Lewiston Dam to the Old Bridge to train our crews and look for early Spring Chinook salmon spawners. We saw two complete redds, and have heard of more redds downstream that we'll pick up on our first survey there next week. There appears to be many spring Chinook salmon in the river so we expect things to get busy soon! We'll announce weekly updates throughout the season on env-trinity and post them at the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Fisheries webpage: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ For now, here's a flier announcing our survey: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/projectUpdates/TRSpawningSurvey/TrinityRiverUsers_SpawnSurveyFlier.pdf Say "Hi" when you see our crews on the water. I hope to see you out there enjoying the river! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Sep 10 11:05:04 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:05:04 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Obama administration bans public from toxic selenium monitoring meetings (updated) References: Message-ID: From: Dan Bacher Date: September 7, 2011 3:50:20 PM PDT Subject: Obama administration bans public from toxic selenium monitoring meetings (updated) http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=4074 Photo: Aerial LANDSAT photo of the Kesterson Wildlife Refuge. landsat_crowskesti5aque.jpg Obama administration bans public from toxic selenium monitoring meetings by Dan Bacher In the latest federal attack on democratic process and transparency in California, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation barred downstream representatives from meetings of a group tasked with monitoring toxin selenium discharges from western San Joaquin Valley agricultural wastewater into the San Joaquin River, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and San Francisco Bay. Bill Jennings, executive director/chairman of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), said the move came on the heels of a new U.S. Geological Survey study indicating that toxic selenium discharges into the San Joaquin River need to be up to 50 times smaller than the current water quality objectives. New federal documents also indicate toxic selenium pollution already exceeds legally safe water quality objectives in water below the federal export pumps in the Delta Mendota Pool. The banned "non-persons," including representatives from the Southern California Watershed Alliance, Food & Water Watch, Crab Boat Owners Association, Sierra Club California, Friends of the River, North Coast Rivers Alliance, California Water Impact Network, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA), California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Salmon Water Now, and AquAlliance, filed a protest letter over the Bureau's outrageous action on Wednesday, September 7. "Late Friday, September 2, 2011, we were informed by Reclamation?s Chair of the Grassland Bypass Project?s Data Collection and Review Team (DCRT) that 'outside observers' will be barred from the meetings of these public agencies who oversee the monitoring of the GBP," the letter stated. "This action seems arbitrary and designed to exclude those most impacted by pollution caused by the GBP?the conservation, fishing and community groups advocating for water quality downstream from the discharge." Why the exclusion from meetings? "No rationale was provided as to why these meetings suddenly need to be held in secret, behind closed doors, excluding only selected members of the public, while others are granted access. For example, consultants for the dischargers, the San Francisco Estuary Institute, lawyers for the Grassland Drainers, and others, are given access," the letter emphasized. The groups said in the letter that it appears that the US Geological Survey study's critique of the program "triggered a backlash" that resulted in the public being banned from the meeting. Pete Lucero, spokesman for the Bureau of Reclamation, responded that the meetings that members of the public were barred from are not public meetings, but are "agency discussions" among scientists doing data collection. "This is not a public forum," said Lucero. "This is a deliberative discussion among the agencies and this is not the right time for public participation. Once we have a document that is ready for public review, there will be the opportunity for the public to weigh in with their comments, questions and concerns relative to the public document." However, Krieger responded, "That's BS because other members of the public are being allowed in. Why are they just excluding those whose interests will be hurt? What do they have to hide? What are they afraid of?" Representatives of fishing, conservation, and community organizations were originally granted access to the now-barred meetings in committments made before the State Water Resources Control Board leading up to the granting of a decade-long pollution waiver for the San Joaquin's toxic selenium dischargers. "The Board granted the pollution waiver extension with the understanding there would be public participation in the monitoring process," according to the groups. "This change in the participation policy alters a material condition upon which granting the permit was based." Secret meetings lead to disaster "This is yet another set of secret meetings just like the Monterey Plus Agreement closed door meetings in 1995 that led to higher water rates for millions of urban ratepayers in southern California," said Carolee Krieger, Executive Director and President of the California Water Impact Network. "Do we really want to go down this road again? How long are we, the public, going to sit and take this?" "Nothing good can come of secret, closed door meetings that welcome polluters and exclude the public and victims of pollution," said Jennings. The San Joaquin's toxic selenium disaster drew national attention in the early 1980s when toxic runoff sparked die-offs and grotesque deformities among waterfowl and other wildlife within the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge, as exposed by US Fish and Wildlife Service biologist and environmental hero Felix Smith, now a board member of the Save the American Association. ?Even though the poisoned ponds of Kesterson were buried in the 1980?s, selenium continues to pollute the waters and wildlife refuges of the San Joaquin Valley and the Delta,? said Krieger. Selenium acts as a beneficial nutrient for humans and other animals in small doses, but can cause serious health problems or death in higher doses, according to the groups. The larger context: the state and federal war on democracy The exclusion of the public by the Bureau of Reclamation occurs in the context of the state and federal governments' war on civil liberties, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, transparency in government and the democratic process. The exclusion of the public from meetings where decisions are being made that will adversely impact them are paralleled in the state and federal plans to build the peripheral canal through the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), California's corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative and numerous other government boondoggles. In the BDCP's Management Committee, Delta residents, fishermen, family farmers, California Indian Tribes and environmental justice communities have been completely excluded. Their exclusion is no surprise, since the Brown and Obama administrations fear that they would question plans to build the peripheral canal ("conveyance"), a budget-busting disaster that would result in the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail, green sturgeon and other imperiled fish species. Likewise, the privately funded MLPA process to create so-called "marine protected areas," in a classic example of institutional racism and elitism, completely excluded tribal scientists from the MLPA Science Advisory Team. Nor did state officials appointed any tribal representatives on the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force until 2010, six years after the privatized process began in 2004 under the direction of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, one was finally appointed. To date, the California Fish and Game Commission has refused to acknowledge tribal gathering rights on the California coast under the MLPA Initiative, a process overseen by a big oil lobbyist, agribusiness hack, real estate executive, coastal developer and other corporate operatives. ?Any attempt to institutionally diminish our right to gather coastal resources is essentially an act of ethnic cleansing,? Yurok Tribal Chairman Thomas O?Rourke said in a news release on June 27. ?We depend on these traditions to carry on our culture for the rest of time.? For a copy of the letter, please visit: http://salmonwaternow.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/USBR-Bars-Public-From-P ollution-Monitoring-Mtgs.pdf. For the press release on the USGS study and links to the report, go to: http://www.c-win.org/content/selenium-pollution-risks-drinking-water-and-wildlife-documented-federal-reports.html). For more information, call Bill Jennings, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, 209-938-9053, http://www.calsport.org, or Carolee Krieger, California Water Impact Network, 805-969-0824, http://www.c-win.org. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: landsat_crowskesti5aque.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 136558 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Sun Sep 11 11:45:28 2011 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:45:28 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Office of Administrative Law disapproves questionable 'marine protected areas' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6AED26D9-25BC-43B4-BDC9-C475A4974808@fishsniffer.com> http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/09/11/office-of- administrative-law-disapproves-questionable-marine-reserves/ http://www.fishsniffer.com/content/1399-office-administrative-law- disapproves-questionable-marine-protected-areas.html The MLPA Initiative, strongly criticized by grassroots environmentalists, fishermen, Indian Tribes, human rights activists and civil liberties advocates, has violated an array of state, federal and international laws since the process was privately funded by the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund Foundation in 2004. ? 640_mlpa_f1.jpg Office of Administrative Law disapproves questionable 'marine protected areas' by Dan Bacher In a victory for opponents of the controversial Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative and champions of open and democratic process in California, the Office of Administrative Law on September 2 disapproved the so-called "marine protected areas" (MPAs) for the Southern California coast that were originally slated to go into effect on October 1, 2011. The California Fish and Game Commission announced that it will discuss "alternative effective dates" for implementation of the marine protected areas at its September 15 meeting in Redding. The Commission delayed the implementation of the fishing closures after OAL informed the Commission that it had additional questions and requests for more information that will require a re-notice of the regulations. OAL disapproved the regulatory action for the following reasons: ? failure to comply with notice requirements for modification of the regulatory text; ? failure to comply with the 'Necessity' standard of Government Code section 11349; ? failure to include all relied upon documents in the rulemaking file; ? failure to provide the reasons for rejecting alternatives that were considered; and ? failure to adequately respond to all of the public comments made regarding the proposed action. The 9-page ruling details how each of these areas of state law were violated in the rush by the Commission and MLPA Initiative officials to create "marine protected areas" in a process chaired by Catherine Reheis-Boyd, president of the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA). George G. Shaw, Senior Staff Council, and Debra N. Cornex, Assistant Chief Counsel Acting Director, for the Office of Administrative Law signed the document. The ruling emphasizes that the Fish and Game Commission is not exempt from the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act, regardless of what Commissioners may think. "The amendment of regulations by the Commission must satisfy requirements established by the part of the APA that governs rulemaking by a state agency," according to the ruling. "Any rule or regulation adopted by a state agency to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by it, or to govern its procedure, is subject to the APA unless a statute expressly exempts the regulation from APA compliance (Gov. Code, sec. 11346). No statute exempts the Commission's rulemaking from APA compliance." The MLPA Initiative, strongly criticized by grassroots environmentalists, fishermen, Indian Tribes, human rights activists and civil liberties advocates, has violated an array of state, federal and international laws since the process was privately funded by the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund Foundation in 2004. The complete OAL ruling is available at: http://www.oal.ca.gov/res/ docs/pdf/disapproval_decisions/2011/2011-0722-04S- DisappDec.pdfwww.oal.ca.gov. The request for "Commission guidance" on the effective date of South Coast marine protected areas, due to the OAL decision, is listed as item 12 on the Commission meeting on September 15. Lawsuit challenges North Central Coast and South Coast regulations A pending lawsuit filed by members of the Partnership for Sustainable Oceans (PSO), a coalition representing the interests of California's recreational anglers and boaters in the MLPA process, adds further uncertainty to when, if ever, the South Coast regulations will go into effect. The lawsuit seeks to set aside the MLPA regulations for the North Central and South Coast study regions, citing a "lack of statutory authority" for the Fish and Game Commission to adopt the regulations. In the case of the South Coast regulations, the litigation cites numerous violations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in the Commission's environmental review of the regulations. A hearing on the North Central Coast portion of the case has been set for September 26, 2011 in San Diego. The controversial North Central Coast marine protected areas have been in place since May 1, 2010. "I'm very pleased that OAL has seen many of the same flaws that we've been seeing alll along in this process," said Bob Fletcher, former president of the Sportfishing Association of California and a plaintiff in the lawsuit. "I don't know what the length of the delay will be, but we're hearing from informed sources that the implementation of South Coast marine protected ares will be delayed until January 1, 2012." He added that the outcome of their litigation could determine whether or not the fishing closures will ever go into effect. "It is clear to us that these regulations are the result of a flawed process and should be overturned," said David Elm, chairman of United Anglers of Southern California (UASC), also a plaintiff. "I urge all anglers, and anyone who supports public access to public resources, to join our fight against the MLPA process in the courts by visiting http://www.OceanAccessProtectionFund.org and making a donation today." Over the past year, recreational fishing groups have scored three court victories in a row against the MLPA Initiative. In June, a San Diego Superior Court judge ruled that two NGOs, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Ocean Conservancy, had no legal right to intervene in the lawsuit by Fletcher, UASC and the Coastside Fishing Club. Grassroots environmental leaders, including John Lewallen, the co- founder of the Ocean Protection Coalition and the North Coast Seaweed Rebellion, strongly support the litigation against the MLPA Initiative. ?A California Superior Court lawsuit challenging the authority of the state to let the private Resources Legacy Fund Foundation operate a process of setting up Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in violation of the 1999 Marine Life Protection Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, the Coastal Act, and other state laws deserves the support of all Californians,? said Lewallen. The three court victories and the OAL decision prove that claims by MLPA Initiative officials and advocates that the process has been "open, transparent and inclusive" are without any basis in fact. Commission still refuses to acknowledge tribal gathering rights The privately funded MLPA process to create so-called "marine protected areas," in a classic example of institutional racism and elitism, completely excluded tribal scientists from the MLPA Science Advisory Team. Nor did state officials appointed any tribal representatives on the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force until 2010, six years after the privatized process began in 2004 under the direction of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, one was finally appointed. To date, the California Fish and Game Commission has refused to acknowledge tribal gathering rights on the California coast under the MLPA Initiative, a process overseen by a big oil lobbyist, agribusiness hack, real estate executive, coastal developer and other corporate operatives. ?Any attempt to institutionally diminish our right to gather coastal resources is essentially an act of ethnic cleansing,? Yurok Tribal Chairman Thomas O?Rourke said in a news release on June 27. ?We depend on these traditions to carry on our culture for the rest of time.? Under "Option 1" of the preferred alternative for North Coast marine protected areas that the Fish and Game Commission accepted during the June 29 meeting, tribal members sixteen or older would have to show, on the request of a game warden, a state recreational fishing license in addition to a federally recognized Tribal ID - and be limited by state regulations. The Yurok Tribe said this decision "failed to protect traditional gathering rights." ?I cannot accept the part about the fishing license," said O'Rourke. "The Fish and Game has taken an unjust and patronizing step. No one can separate these resources from our culture.? Tribal proposals for marine protected areas on the North coast will be discussed at the Commission meeting on Thursday, September 15. The discussion is listed as item 4 on the agenda. The meeting will start at 8:30 a.m. at the Red Lion Hotel, Sierra Room, 11830 Hilltop Drive, Redding (http://www.fgc.ca.gov). For more information about the Yurok Tribe, go to: http:// www.yuroktribe.org. MLPA Initiative Background: The Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) is a law, signed by Governor Gray Davis in 1999, designed to create a network of marine protected areas off the California Coast. However, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2004 created the privately-funded MLPA "Initiative" to "implement" the law, effectively eviscerating the MLPA. The "marine protected areas" created under the MLPA Initiative fail to protect the ocean from oil spills and drilling, water pollution, military testing, wave and wind energy projects, corporate aquaculture and all other uses of the ocean other than fishing and gathering. The MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Forces that oversaw the implementation of "marine protected areas" included a big oil lobbyist, marina developer, real estate executive and other individuals with numerous conflicts of interest. Catherine Reheis Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association who is pushing for new oil drilling off the California coast, served as the chair of the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force for the South Coast and a member of the task forces for the North Central Coast and North Coast. The MLPA Initiative operated through a controversial private/public "partnership funded by the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund Foundation. The Schwarzenegger administration, under intense criticism by grassroots environmentalists, fishermen and Tribal members, authorized the implementation of marine protected areas under the initiative through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the foundation and the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG). Tribal members, fishermen, grassroots environmentalists, human rights advocates and civil liberties activists have slammed the MLPA Initiative for the violation of numerous state, federal and international laws. Critics charge that the initiative, privatized by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2004, has violated the Bagley-Keene Open Meetings Act, Brown Act, California Administrative Procedures Act, American Indian Religious Freedom Act and UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: unknown.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 212602 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Sep 12 11:34:41 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 11:34:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle- Anger lingers over towns flooded by Trinity Dam Message-ID: <8CAC23E7-5B25-46E7-90D3-E4C545EE23E2@att.net> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/12/MNO71L2JBO.DTL&feed=rss.news Anger lingers over towns flooded by Trinity Dam Carolyn Jones, Chronicle Staff Writer Monday, September 12, 2011 The closest Mary Hamilton can get to her hometown is on a boat in the middle of a lake. There, beneath the watery depths of Trinity Lake, lies old Trinity Center - its homes and hotels, saloons and schools, ranches and resorts - all now a murky underwater ghost town. In its day, Trinity Center was a lively hub of commerce, a major stop on the only road from San Francisco to Portland. But all that washed away when the government built Trinity Dam and flooded the valley. "My parents fought it, but it didn't do any good," said Hamilton, 79, whose family lived in and around Trinity Center for generations. "It was terrible. Just awful. So much pioneer work went into building that town, it was like losing a part of yourself." It's been 50 years since the Bureau of Reclamation built Trinity Lake, flooding Trinity Center, Stringtown and Minersville into oblivion. As dwindling numbers of former residents gather for reunions, emotions remain raw over the loss of their towns and the struggle to keep the memories alive. 'nobody wanted this' "It's like a death," said Hamilton, who was in her early 20s when the order came to evacuate. "The lake is beautiful, but so much was lost. Nobody wanted this. We were just devastated." Trinity Lake isn't the only Northern California reservoir with ghost towns scattered along its bottom. Lake Shasta, built in the late 1930s and early 1940s, contains the remnants of Kennett, which in its heyday had 10,000 residents, an opera house, three-story hotels, a hospital, a cemetery and the famed Diamond Bar Saloon, reputedly the most opulent bar between Sacramento and Portland. Kennett residents were so mad about the dam that some refused to leave, said Jay Thompson, a historian at the Shasta Historical Society in Redding. "They were pioneers," he said. "There was a lot of hard labor that went into building this town, and they weren't just going to go." But as the water crept up over doors, windows and eventually rooftops, go they did. Now Kennett is 400 feet underwater. With the loss of these towns, a slice of Western history vanished as well, historians said. Most of these towns dated from California's earliest days and were microcosms of the California story: First came mining, then logging, with a little ranching, tourism and partying thrown in. "These little towns were boom-bust-boom-bust for generations," said Howard May, historian at the Trinity County Historical Society in Weaverville. "They were all highly local, self-sufficient places. It was life on a very small scale - socially, economically, culturally." Before the railroads, the main wagon road to Oregon and points north went through the rugged, picturesque Trinity Alps, bypassing the Shasta area because of hostile relations with the local American Indians, historians said. In its day, Trinity County was among the most populated areas in the state. It's now among the least populated, with only 14,000 residents spread over 2 million acres. precious memories Mark Groves, 82, has great memories of Stringtown, where his family had lived on and off for decades. There was a bar, a store and a school, with a few dozen houses strung along the road, hence the name. Everyone got together for baseball games against Trinity Center and Lewiston, he said. And the fishing, everyone agrees, was incredible. Before the dam, salmon migrated freely up the Trinity River in great numbers and were a staple of the local diet. "When the government engineers came, we had a lot of town meetings. They were packed," Groves said. "Virtually everyone was opposed to the dam. But it was a fait accompli. The government came in, and that was it." The government paid property owners for their land, but residents had no recourse if they didn't want to leave. "These days, people's first stop would be the Sierra Club in San Francisco," May said. "But back then, these places were very isolated. You weren't within 10 feet of the levers of power." Some moved to nearby towns, and others left the area entirely. Residents of Trinity Center actually moved some of the buildings, including the Odd Fellows hall, uphill to form a new Trinity Center, which is now along Highway 3. For decades, residents were so bitter about the dam that they tore down signs and misdirected tourists for what the government dubbed Clair Engle Lake, named after a Democratic U.S. senator who was active in water policy. It wasn't until 10 years ago that the government changed the name to Trinity Lake. a boon for some But for some residents, the dam was good news, May said. The towns were suffering economically as mining dried up, and some welcomed a payout from the government, he said. "Like in the recession today, some people were economically marooned," he said. "If you were stuck with no money in, say, Stringtown, it felt like the lowest nether regions of the world." But for those with jobs and homes and a wide social network, "this was like Armageddon," he said. Groves and his family moved to the Coffee Creek area, where they started a winery. His son, Keith, the last baby born in Stringtown, said that in some ways, Trinity Lake didn't just swallow three towns, it also stripped residents of much of their prized self-sufficiency. With the dam, the fisheries are greatly diminished, and lake levels - which affect tourism - fluctuate widely based on the state's water needs. "There's a lot of frustration because these policies are still out of our hands," he said. "But this all happened in 1955. People back then didn't really argue with the federal government." E-mail Carolyn Jones at carolynjones at sfchronicle.com. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/12/MNO71L2JBO.DTL This article appeared on page A - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Mon Sep 12 12:17:26 2011 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 12:17:26 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Legislature Approves Controversial CEQA 'Reforms' In-Reply-To: <8CAC23E7-5B25-46E7-90D3-E4C545EE23E2@att.net> References: <8CAC23E7-5B25-46E7-90D3-E4C545EE23E2@att.net> Message-ID: Legislature Approves Controversial CEQA 'Reforms' by Dan Bacher The Planning and Conservation League (PCL) on September 10 announced its opposition to controversial "reforms" of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) approved by the Legislature. This legislation to eviscerate CEQA is on its way to Governor Jerry Brown's desk. "The Planning & Conservation League, joining with a coalition including Sierra Club California, Coalition for Clean Air, Clean Water Action, and a host of environmental justice and community groups from the Los Angeles area and throughout California, tried valiantly to stave off three bills that will weaken protections of The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)," according to the PCL Insider publication. "Unfortunately, SB 226 (Simitian), SB 292 (Padilla) and AB 900 (Buchanan), all either introduced or dramatically amended in the last 36 hours of the legislative session, passed the Legislature on its final day of session. SB 226 will, if signed into law by the Governor, exempt from CEQA certain urban projects deemed ?green?, with inadequate definitions of for what defines ?urban? and ?green,'" PCL said. AB 900, while not an exemption, ?streamlines? CEQA?s judicial review requirements, potentially limiting the public?s voice in challenging projects. These questionable "reforms" take place at a time when over 11 million fish have been killed in the state and federal Delta water pumping facilities since January 1. Undermining CEQA only makes the epic task of restoring our imperiled Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon, Sacramento splittail and other fish populations even harder. For more information on the Delta fish carnage, go to: http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/09/09/ over-11-million-fish-salvaged-in-delta-death-pumps-since-january-1/ These "reforms" have been passed by the Legislature at a time when our fish populations, fishing rights and environment are under assault by corporate interests. The Brown and Obama administrations are fast-tracking the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) process to build their beloved peripheral canal to export more water to corporate agribusiness and southern California water agencies. The attempt to exempt so-called "green" projects from CEQA sounds like yet another opportunity for corporate interests to greenwash their legacy by setting up fake "green" projects that are not subject to a thorough environmental review. This is the problem that grassroots environmentalists, fishermen and Tribes encountered in dealing with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative. MLPA advocates argued that since the MLPA, overseen by oil industry, real estate, marina development, agribusiness and other corporate operatives, was a "green" project, it was not subject to a complete environmental review under CEQA. Fortunately champions of open and democratic process in California scored a major victory when the Office of Administrative Law on September 2 disapproved the so-called "marine protected areas" (MPAs) for the Southern California coast that were originally slated to go into effect on October 1, 2011. ( http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/ 2011/09/11/office-of-administrative-law-disapproves-questionable- marine-reserves/) The attempt by the Legislature to further limit the public voice by "streamlining" CEQA's judicial requirements under AB 900 also couldn't come at a worse time, a time when the state and federal governments have launched a virtual war on civil liberties, freedom of speech and assembly, democratic process and the U.S and California Constitutions. SB 226, SB 292 and AB 900 exemplify how the Legislature has become little more than a tool of corporate interests and corrupt political operatives who seek to overthrow what few vestiges of democracy and public process remain in California! Below is the complete statement from the PCL Insider: PCL INSIDER: News from the Capitol CONTROVERSIAL CEQA REFORMS APPROVED BY LEGISLATURE PCL stands strong with coalition partners in opposing 11th-hour bills that weaken California?s landmark environmental and community protection law The Planning & Conservation League, joining with a coalition including Sierra Club California, Coalition for Clean Air, Clean Water Action, and a host of environmental justice and community groups from the Los Angeles area and throughout California, tried valiantly to stave off three bills that will weaken protections of The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Unfortunately, SB 226 (Simitian), SB 292 (Padilla) and AB 900 (Buchanan), all either introduced or dramatically amended in the last 36 hours of the legislative session, passed the Legislature on its final day of session. SB 226 will, if signed into law by the Governor, exempt from CEQA certain urban projects deemed ?green?, with inadequate definitions of for what defines ?urban? and ?green?. It could, therefore, allow sprawl or other impactful projects without adequate environmental review. AB 900, while not an exemption, ?streamlines? CEQA?s judicial review requirements, potentially limiting the public?s voice in challenging projects. And SB 292 is, most simply, special treatment under the law for an influential developer (AEG) seeking to build a downtown Los Angeles football stadium. By depriving petitioners of the opportunity for superior court jurisdiction, SB 292 and AB 900 may even violate the California Constitution. PCL certainly wants to see California take necessary and overdue steps to promote green projects in California, while putting people back to work and transforming the State into a leader in sustainable development; but these 11th-hour efforts, while perhaps well- intentioned, were ill-conceived. They attack important protections of CEQA that have given communities a voice in the development process for more than four decades, with a great deal of uncertainty as to whether these measures were needed to, or will in fact, create more jobs in California. Moreover, the measures themselves were hastily crafted and poorly thought-out. Some legislators, such as Senator Sam Blakeslee (R, 15th District), did complain about the hastily crafted nature of AB 900 before voting against the bill. That legislation?s shortcomings were seemingly acknowledged by Senate Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, (D, 6th District), who agreed that ?clean-up? legislation will have to be introduced next year to address the problems with AB 900. In addition to depriving legislators with final bill language before they voted, the rushed process also deprived the public from having meaningful input into the process. PCL would like to thank the many organizations and individuals who stood strong against this process, and the legislators, like Senator Noreen Evans (D, 2nd District) Assembly member Jared Huffman (D, 6th District) who spoke so eloquently for good governance and for environmental and community protection. While disappointed at the outcome, PCL will continue to work with its environmental partners, the Legislature, and local communities to ensure that projects developed pursuant these streamlined processes will still protect our environment and public welfare, while we continue to advocate for CEQA to remain a strong environmental bill of rights for all Californians. For more information, contact the Planning and Conservation League (PCL) 1107 9th Street, Suite 901, Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone (916) 822-5631 ? Fax (916) 822-5650 pclmail [at] pcl.org ? http://www.PCL.org ? http://www.PCLFoundation.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From acaswr at yahoo.com Mon Sep 12 15:05:57 2011 From: acaswr at yahoo.com (lou jacobson) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:05:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [env-trinity] State legislators reject public goods charge. In-Reply-To: <8CAC23E7-5B25-46E7-90D3-E4C545EE23E2@att.net> References: <8CAC23E7-5B25-46E7-90D3-E4C545EE23E2@att.net> Message-ID: <1315865157.98830.YahooMailNeo@web120216.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> For all of you energy and water nerds. The rejection of the public goods charge by our fair weather legislators could do insurmountable harm to our energy efficiency industry unless we take action. Please email, call or visit your representative and let them know that energy efficiency and the PGC are important components in California's efforts to meet regs. outlined in AB32. This is not just about job-creation but workforce maintenance. Energy efficiency alone is a multi-billion dollar industry in California.? Folks like me, an efficiency specialist, will be forced to leave the state in search of new opportunities in more progressive states. A tremendous amount of institutional knowledge and skills will be lost and California will loose. Lou Jacobson _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The upper house also rejected a last-minute push to reauthorize an energy surcharge touted by Brown as a tool to promote job creation. The 1.5 percent tax on power bills, known as the Public Goods Charge, generates more than $400 million a year and is used to fund energy efficiency efforts, renewable energy projects and research and development. The Democratic governor had characterized the investments as an opportunity to spark "green" job creation. But the measure, contained in two bills, fell far short of passage late as the Legislature's final scheduled day of session stretched into the early morning hours Saturday. Assembly Bill 724, the only part of the package to come up for a floor vote, only received 20 of the 27 votes needed to clear the upper house. Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/09/10/v-mobile/3899029/capitol-alert-senate-sends-jerry.html#ixzz1XmIgs900 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 14 10:20:44 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:20:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal (8/10)- Reservoir serves many purposes Message-ID: <5682B2BB-3E70-4F5F-801B-803E1C589533@att.net> Reservoir serves many purposes http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-08-10/Front_Page/Reservoir_serves_many_purposes.html Studies show long-term economic, environmental impact on Trinity County somewhat mixed BY SALLY MORRIS THE TRINITY JOURNAL When full, Trinity Lake is 17 miles in length, 1-4 miles wide and has 145 miles of shoreline. PHIL NELSON | THE TRINITY JOURNAL . FLIGHT PROVIDED BY TONY EDWARDS As campers flock here and boaters converge on Trinity Lake to enjoy high water levels not seen in years thanks to a bountiful snowpack last winter, it?s easy to see the impact of tourist dollars on the local economy as visitors crowd store aisles to load up on supplies. However, the long view depicts a more boom and bust picture of the economic impacts on Trinity County associated with the federal government?s completion of Trinity Dam 50 years ago. Many promises of jobs and growth to rival Lake Tahoe were made to local residents at that time as Congress recognized that Trinity County would be economically and socially impacted by construction of the Trinity River Division to divert water to California?s Central Valley for irrigation and municipal uses. For one thing, the project flooded 14,500 acres of land in Trinity County, much of which was privately owned, relatively flat and highly suitable for future residential, agricultural and commercial development. To offset the loss of private land for development and the tax base that went with it in a county where more than 75 percent of the land was already owned by the federal government, ongoing payments in lieu of taxes were promised to the county. The government also promised low-cost electric power to help stimulate the local economy ? an asset that was delayed in delivery and took many years for the Trinity Public Utilities District to develop and realize. Few studies on the local economic impacts of the Trinity River Division exist. One commissioned by the TPUD several years ago concluded that overall, the county?s economy has mainly suffered. It found that the government provisions to aid in recovery have fallen far short of replacing what was lost, while other California communities greatly benefited from low-cost Trinity River water and power delivered. The study by David Kelley at California State University, Chico identified $33.6 million in lost local property tax values; $1.6 million in foregone agricultural revenue; $40 million in undelivered electricity; $11.5 million in lost purchasing power; $11.9 million in lost local income; and $2.4 million in foregone taxes on power facilities. While that study focused largely on hydropower impacts, the author also identified a $4.2 million loss in local revenue due to decline in the Trinity River?s fishery resulting from dam construction and reduced flows downstream. The Kelley study did not evaluate the recreational benefits of Trinity Lake, but cited them as a possible offset for lost fisheries. It noted that prior to dam construction, the Trinity River provided a constant source of recreational activities and revenue to local citizens whereas lake recreation is not constant ? it fluctuates with the water level. While the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation operates the dam and calls the shots on lake levels based on annual precipitation amounts, Trinity Lake is part of the National Recreation Area managed by the U.S. Forest Service that operates the campgrounds and boating facilities. A Forest Service study was conducted a few years ago that focused on the relationship between water levels at Shasta Lake and the economic impact of recreation spending on surrounding local economies. Some of the information was extrapolated to include Trinity Lake and Trinity communities. It concluded that during nondrought conditions, the lake produces an 11 percent change in economic activity and jobs for the local economy. However, in drought conditions when lake levels fall, the study results showed as much as a 33 percent difference in economic activity between average drawdown years and low-water years. Light glistens off Trinity Lake earlier this summer. The lake serves as a major economic draw for the county. PHIL NELSON | THE TRINITY JOURNAL While the Trinity County economy experienced a boom during the dam construction years, it has been subject to ebbs and flows ever since depending in part on the water year. It suffered years of loss due to decimated fisheries, but has also benefited from millions of federal dollars spent on the resulting Trinity River Restoration Program. One outcome has been increased annual river flows ? intended to restore fisheries, but providing an added benefit to local rafting companies and whitewater enthusiasts. Recent drought years helped to spark a citizens? group at the north end of the county called the Trinity Lake Revitalization Alliance to engage the Forest Service and Bureau of Reclamation in efforts they hope will improve recreational access to the lake during future low-water years when only one launch ramp is available for use. The group claims that in light of reduced national forest logging and mining opportunities in the area, water-based tourism now accounts for as much as 90 percent of the economy at the lake end of Trinity County and businesses close as water levels plunge. This year?s high lake level is resulting in welcome business to the private resorts and marinas, stores and restaurants. Some say they could use more than one good year and they are finding that visitors, though plentiful, are reluctant to spend money as the national and state economies continue to struggle. Trinity County and Weaverville Chamber of Commerce volunteers say they have been very busy fielding phone calls and requests for information about the county?s recreational opportunities. Web sites have also been active. ?The lake level makes a big difference, at least psychologically. If it?s not full, people feel there?s no reason to come up even though there?s still plenty of water to have fun in,? said Trinity County Chamber of Commerce President Pat Zugg. She joked that an occasional rainy day in the middle of summer is also a good thing. ?It drives the campers into town to visit our shops, go to the museum and eat out. We could really use about one rainy day a week,? she laughed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1p1.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5425 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1p2.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8481 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1p3.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7378 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1p4.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12020 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1p5.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3689 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 14 11:22:23 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 11:22:23 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CSPA, Winnemem Wintu sue Westlands over contract renewals Message-ID: <392E0E66-E96B-4B7A-B4B4-91A782C085BE@att.net> CSPA, Winnemem Wintu sue Westlands over contract renewals by Dan Bacher http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/09/13/18690148.php Tuesday Sep 13th, 2011 9:25 AM "These Proposed Contracts, if implemented, would have adverse impacts on the Delta, including but not limited to degraded water quality; harmful impacts upon sensitive and/or endangered species; lost of fish and wildlife habitat; and impaired recreation," the document concludes. The 117 mile-long Delta Mendota Canal delivers Delta water to Westlands Water District and other San Joaquin Valley water contractors. Photo courtesy of US Bureau of Reclamation. 640_dmc.jpg original image ( 655x442) CSPA, Winnemem Wintu sue Westlands over contract renewals by Dan Bacher The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), Friends of the River, North Coast River Alliance, Save the American River Association and Winnemem Wintu Tribe have filed a lawsuit against Westlands Water District and its two water distribution districts over the renewal of six interim water service contracts. The action, filed 25 August 2011, concerns six Central Valley Project (CVP) contracts providing up to over one million acre feet of water annually from the Delta. The groups and Tribe say water exports out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta are a principle reason for the decline of Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations. Westlands, et al, claims the contracts are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A call to a spokesperson for Westlands regarding their rationale for claiming a CEQA exemption had not been returned at press time. The coalition disagrees strongly with the CEQA exemption for the contracts. The lawsuit asks for: injunctive relief, restraining the defendant from carrying out the project; a writ of mandate, setting aside contract approval; and declaratory relief, declaring the contracts to be unlawful, according to Bill Jennings, Executive Director/Chairman of CSPA. "The environmental devastation wrought on the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta by Central Valley Project operations generally and Westlands' diversions specifically has become patent in recent years," the petition states. "The importation of over 1,000,000 acre feet of water from the Delta to Westlands has caused substantial harm to the Delta's imperiled fisheries. Boron, selenium and salt pollution in the Delta originates in part from return flow discharged by Westlands and surrounding water contractors." Key fish species imperiled by Delta water exports and contaminated return flows include winter, spring and fall runs of Sacramento River chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta smelt, longfin smelt and threadfin shad, according to the petition. "These Proposed Contracts, if implemented, would have adverse impacts on the Delta, including but not limited to degraded water quality; harmful impacts upon sensitive and/or endangered species; lost of fish and wildlife habitat; and impaired recreation," the document concludes. The lawsuit takes place at a critical time for Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations. Over 11 million fish have been "salvaged" in the state and federal pumping facilities in the South Delta since January 1 as record amounts of water are exported to southern California and corporate agribusiness. A horrific 8,985,009 Sacramento splittail, the largest number ever recorded, were salvaged by September 7, according to Department of Fish and Game data. The previous record salvage number for the splittail, a native minnow found only in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River system, was 5.5 million in 2006. Agency staff also listed 35,560 chinook salmon, 1,642 steelhead, 51 Delta smelt and 14 green sturgeon as "salvaged" in the pumping facilities this year to date (http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/09/09/over-11-million-fish-salvaged-in-delta-death-pumps-since-january-1/). Chinook salmon, a fish devastated in recent years by record water exports out of the estuary, are an integral part of the religion and culture of the Winnemem Wintu (McCloud River) Tribe and other Native American nations. The Tribe is now engaged in an ambitious program to return the original strain of winter run chinook salmon, now thriving in the Rakaira and other rivers in New Zealand, to the McCloud River above Lake Shasta. "Salmon are the ultimate source of good health for California Indians that have been missing from our diets for generations now," said Caleen Sisk-Franco, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. "We need them back in our rivers and we need them back in our diets for balance to return to our world." The lawsuit also proceeds at time when the Brown and Obama administrations are fast-tracking the construction of the peripheral canal through the Bay Conservation Plan (BDCP) to divert more Delta water to corporate agribusiness and southern California. The law offices of Stephan C. Volker are representing CSPA and the Coalition in this matter. For more information, go to: http://www.calsport.org. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 640_dmc.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 131497 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Aazhderian at sldmwa.org Wed Sep 14 15:51:24 2011 From: Aazhderian at sldmwa.org (Ara Azhderian) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 22:51:24 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Let Them Drink Dust! Message-ID: <971CECF3FE6CFF459F9CF15BE1026F8C1EA40C@SLDMWA-EX.DM.local> Headline: Let Them Drink Dust! Publication: Forbes Byline: Henry Miller Date: September 14, 2011 http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2011/09/14/let-them-drink-dust/ In any scientific dispute spawned by the Endangered Species Act, the government almost always wins. Even if persuasive scientific evidence shows that federal environmental regulators are wrong or that they ignored all the facts that didn't fit their preconceptions, the courts routinely defer to them. But not always. In litigation that has been playing out in California for the last four years, regulators have been so incompetent and dishonest in the federal (mis)management of the state's water supplies that the courts ruled against them. The U.S. District Court has found repeatedly that federal regulators failed to perform the most rudimentary analysis before ordering massive cuts in water that have reduced California's supplies by more than a third during the last three years. "This is evidence of [Fish and Wildlife Service] intransigence," the court ruled in the most recent of these cases at the end of August. "The agency's 'lack of data' apologetic is the premise for the agency to do what it chooses." (As the principal federal partner responsible for administering the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has primary responsibility for recovering and conserving imperiled plant and animal species.) In this instance, FWS was proposing to use 300,000 to 670,000 acre-feet of water to flush a handful of minnows called delta smelt a few miles farther west in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. (The lower amount is enough water to meet all of San Francisco's drinking water needs for nearly two years.) Instead of being available to help California's cities and farms recover from the ruinous combined effects of three years of drought and federal regulation, all of that water would simply have run out into the ocean, unconserved, unrecycled and unavailable for any other use. In 2009 this loss of tens of billions of gallons of water left hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland barren and forced cities in Southern California to ration their supplies. The drought is over now, but under federal rules, the more it rains the more water gets wasted by release into the ocean. According to the court, by bypassing NEPA (the National Environmental Policy Act) the federal fish agencies "completely abdicated their responsibility to consider reasonable alternatives to the [proposed] action that would not only protect the species, but would also minimize the adverse impact on humans and the human environment. The result is the issuance and implementation of a one-sided, single purpose [action] that inflicts drastic consequences on California water users, a situation NEPA prohibits." (NEPA requires that federal agencies consider the environmental impact - construed broadly - of any "major action" they take.) The court found the regulators' fundamental error: "There is essentially no biological evidence to support" this massive waste of water. And the feds knew it. The proposed action had been criticized as lacking any clear scientific basis by the National Research Council (the research arm of the National Academy of Sciences), by the federal government's own independent review panel, and by numerous senior scientists who had studied the issue. The "biological opinion" - a sort of regulatory directive - which includes this massive water release had already been rejected by the district court as "shoddy science' which is "arbitrary and capricious" in its misapplication of science. Yet FWS was undeterred. Its idea was to move the point at which salt and fresh water mix in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to a place that they opined was ideal for the smelt. But the scientific evidence shows that the smelt exist at many different salinity levels. Rather than clustering at one point, they range over 24 miles of the delta. In fact, the feds were forced to admit in court that their analysis failed to include 60% of the smelt population that is in an area that would be completely unaffected by the proposed action. No one has been able to demonstrate that the location of this mixing point has anything to do with the abundance of smelt. The National Research Council found that the fish agencies' claims on this score were "poor and sometimes confounding." Even when the feds brought together a review panel and cherry picked the data by refusing to provide the evidence that questioned FWS' proposal, the panelists nevertheless complained that the government's plan was "woefully deficient." The principal proponent of the smelt plan is a federal biologist who supported his claim with a chart that used one data set on both axes. When you compare something to itself you find correspondence. Duh! But as more competent scientists pointed out, it is "meaningless." The same guy had also once produced a model of the smelt's life cycle to support his theory, but it was withdrawn because of what he called a "practical complication." And what was that complication? As he admitted on the witness stand, it showed that 54% of the time the application of these massive water releases would produce "negative abundance" - that is, it would kill the smelt, not help them. In the end, the court concluded euphemistically that his "credibility is called into question" and "his scientific objectivity is compromised by inconsistency." But the 3-inch-long smelts, which nobody eats and which have no commercial value, are not really the issue. They are just a pretext for the federal bureaucrats and their academic and environmental allies to attack a water system they blame for all the woes of the delta. Together they have been managing the decline of that estuary for decades, and as one of the attorneys in the most recent case quipped, "No other experts need apply." Their objective, according to one of the academic high priests of the smelt cult, is to persuade people to get over our addiction to water. Where is the outrage at this sort of arrogance and idiocy? This situation stinks like a dead smelt. The public water agencies responsible for serving two-thirds of California's inhabitants shouldn't have to go to court to protect the public from federal irresponsibility. Fortunately, case by case, science and the public interest have been pushing back against ideology. The academic defenders of the blame-the-thirsty faith have denounced this process as "combat science." People who think Galileo was right would call it telling truth to power. Because the FWS plan is part of an earlier case that is currently on appeal, the court couldn't prohibit it altogether. At least the damage will be severely reduced. But as the judge observed at the end of his opinion, "The agencies still 'don't get it.' They continue to believe their 'right to be mistaken' excuses [the lack of] precise and competent scientific analysis for actions they know will wreak havoc on California's water supply." Why hasn't anyone else in government or academia simply called a halt to this nonsense? The answer may be that careers are at stake - along with so many lucrative research grants and consultancies. Meanwhile, the feds are trying to enforce the Endangered Species Act from inside a hen house in a way that makes foxes of us all. Henry I. Miller, a physician and molecular biologist, is the Robert Wesson Fellow in Scientific Philosophy and Public Policy at the Hoover Institution and a fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. He was the founding director of the Office of Biotechnology at the FDA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Sep 16 11:37:11 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:37:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Siskiyou Sheriff Plays Politics Message-ID: <0F66565A-C356-4AAB-9F25-13EFB4E64E8E@att.net> I have also attached Sheriff Lopey's letter to the Director of the California Department of Fish and Game that is referenced below in the article. Tom Stokely, env-trinity list manager http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/09/siskiyou-sheriff-plays-politics/comment-page-1/#comment-61945 Siskiyou Sheriff Plays Politics Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey confers with visitors just before a well attended meeting of irrigators in Yreka last week. Lopey warned the crowd not to give up their rights to agencies and pledged that their local elected officials would stand with them. / Photo by Malcolm Terence. Labor Day Meeting Riles Up Scott Valley Irrigators By Malcolm Terence, Two Rivers Tribune Contributing Writer YREKA?Siskiyou County irrigators circled the wagons last week as Sheriff Jon Lopey and other local officials told them not to surrender their constitutional rights or their water rights. The meeting, which drew nearly 250 people, followed on the heels of lawsuits and increased scrutiny by conservation groups and increased pressure from state and federal agencies. The controversy has brewed for years because stretches of the Scott and Shasta River systems are dewatered at the expense of fish. Lopey, who was just elected last November told the crowd gathered outdoors at the fairgrounds that there were a lot of new developments. ?We don?t want to wait around,? he warned and laid out a strategy for county government to protect the ranchers from what he characterized as the coercive intrusions of outside agencies. For a law officer who stated repeatedly that he was not a politician, Lopey did well at holding the crowd but the speaker who got the most attention was Doug Jenner, a Scott Valley rancher, who said he was threatened with possible civil or criminal charges recently by state and federal officials. Jenner said he first got a phone call from an agent from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) who asked for a meeting but wouldn?t disclose why. The next day Jenner got a call saying there were problems with his irrigation diversion. Next, the agent came to his door in the company of a state Fish and Game warden and Jenner said the agent ?read me my rights? before he would begin any discussion. The reference is to the so-called ?Miranda Rights? that a peace officer reads a suspect before gathering evidence. Jenner also quoted the agent as saying that fish were dying and told Jenner that he would investigate. Then an agency lawyer would decide whether to prosecute. The rancher said he told the agents that he was keeping all the pools below his diversion hydrated to protect juvenile fish and that he operated under an agreement with state Fish and Game. Jenner also asked them if they had the right to be on his land and the agent responded that he even had the right to cut locks to gain access. Earlier in the meeting Lopey said the county was demanding more role in the policies and procedures of state and federal agencies in Siskiyou County and cited a legal approach he called ?Coordination.? He even read most of a lengthy letter he?d written to the director of state Fish and Game demanding this right to coordination ?for all programs, activities or projects ?which impact law enforcement, the economy or social programs.? One of his specific demands was that his office and local landowners be better advised in advance of entry on to private property or in alterations of water flows. He said this was important because county residents had alleged discourtesy and coercion. Lopey drew loud applause when he said, ?The agencies care more about fish, frogs and birds than they do about the people of Siskiyou County.? He mourned the roll back of what was once a large local timber industry and said that present actions threatened the survival of agriculture. He linked the economic setbacks to reduced tax revenues which meant less law enforcement and other public services and cited an increase in substance abuse and child and elder abuse in the county. Another speaker was a local rancher named Scott Murphy who said he?d attended a recent legislative hearing in Sacramento and felt the list of speakers was intentionally stacked against agricultural interests. He singled out Erica Terence, head of the conservation group Klamath River Keeper, who showed enlarged photos of dead fish at the hearing. He said he warned Ms. Terence that she?d be arrested if she trespassed on his land and she told him she was on a navigable river, which meant access was permissible. Murphy said he?d tried to research navigability but the results were inconclusive and asked Lopey for his opinion. Lopey answered, ?It?s not navigable if you can?t put a boat on it,? and coached landowners that they have a right to file a complaint if people trespass. In answer to one questioner, Sheriff Lopey warned landowners against physically restraining any accused trespasser and suggested instead that they send descriptions, photos or video to his office. Jim Cook, chair of the County Board of Supervisors, said the county government could declare whether a water course was navigable or not and suggested the county would take action. Marcia Armstrong, the county supervisor who represents Scott Valley on the board, warned the crowd about a lawsuit that has been filed by the the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen?s Associations (PCFFA) teamed up with the California conservation organization Environmental Law Foundation. The law suit says that California is one of only two states that does not regulate ground water but leaves regulation of wells, instead, to counties. Siskiyou County has held that its local courts have authority in the case, not Sacramento where it was filed, but the court has turned down a change of venue. Other speakers warned of other attacks on local agriculture and State Senator Doug LaMalfa said, ?I don?t believe the end game is about saving fish. I believe it?s about control of our water.? LaMalfa, before politics, was a rice farmer in Butte County. Dave Bitts, president of PCFFA, said he missed the Yreka meeting because he is a working fisherman but wrote, ?I can understand landowners? reluctance to have state and federal people on their property. I don?t particularly enjoy being boarded by Fish & Game or the Coast Guard ? but it happens, and putting up with it, hopefully amicably, is a condition of doing business for fishermen. I have had the impression that Fish & Game has bent over backwards to work cooperatively with landowners in the Scott and Shasta basins, maybe sometimes too far over from a fishhead?s perspective.? His livelihood, Bitts said, and that of all commercial fishermen, depends on robust runs of fall Chinook salmon in the ocean. Those runs, in turn, depend on adequate flows of cool water in tributaries of the Klamath, including the Scott and Shasta Rivers. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1737siskiyousheriff.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 43699 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: LetterFromSiskiyouCountySheriff[1].pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 174699 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Sep 16 12:43:15 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:43:15 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] ACWA News- Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority Plans to Appeal Area-of-Origin Ruling Message-ID: http://www.acwa.com/news/legal-affairs-committee/tehama-colusa-canal-authority-plans-appeal-area-origin-ruling Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority Plans to Appeal Area-of-Origin Ruling Submitted by Sarah Langford on Wed, 09/14/2011 - 2:44pm in Legal Affairs CommitteeWater News A northern California water district announced today it plans to appeal the decision of a federal district court in an area-of-origin water rights case. In August, Judge Oliver Wanger ruled in a suit filed by Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority that Central Valley Project contractors in the Sacramento Valley are not entitled to a priority of water allocations in dry years over exports to water contractors located south of the Delta. TCCA, with landowners in Tehama, Glenn, Colusa, and Yolo counties, argued that its water users should have priority in dry years over federal water contractors south of the Delta based on the state?s area-of-origin water rights rules. In 10 of the past 33 years, TCCA has received less than its full water contract, causing shortages on the 150,000 acres of land it services. A 2006 a water case dubbed "the Roby decision,? in which California appellate Judge Ronald Roby ruled that the federal Bureau of Reclamation was required to follow state rules, served as the basis for TCCA?s recent lawsuit. But the two cases were not identical, and in his 88-page decision, Wanger upheld arguments made by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and San Joaquin Valley CVP contractors. In a statement, TCCA Board President Ken LaGrande said he believes there are ?significant grounds for an appeal? and that his agency is confident the recent ruling would be overturned. Attachment Size 110914 PR.pdf 387.58 KB -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: gavel-3.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7814 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Sep 19 13:03:21 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 13:03:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CC Times- Environmental poison in San Francisco Bay could increase with Delta water plan References: <5E88C170-67DB-4008-B203-511C5270E3E2@att.net> Message-ID: See C-WIN's Selenium Press Room at http://www.c-win.org/selenium-press-room.html. It contains a stunning chart comparing existing Bay-Delta selenium water quality standards with the findings of this new USGS report located at http://www.c-win.org/sites/default/files/images/image004.jpg. The Trinity River was dammed to irrigate toxic lands in the Western San Joaquin Valley in the San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project. See a 1959 map of the Trinity River water permitted places of use by the California State Water Resources Control Board at: http://tcrcd.net/exhibita.htm. See C-WIN's Trinity River web pages at http://www.c-win.org/meet-trinity-river.html Read about how Westlands worked to get the Trinity River dammed back in 1953 in the e-book by Dane Durham, "How the Trinity Lost Its Water" on the C-WIN website at http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/175. It includes a forward by the late Byron Leydecker. The low hanging fruit has been picked and selenium continues to discharge into the San Joaquin River and Bay-Delta from the Grasslands Bypass Project (GBP). The GBP has been allowed to discharge selenium and other pollutants from the northerly area of the San Luis Unit into Mud Slough and the San Joaquin River from 1995 until the end of 2019 with no real solution available at this time (other than ceasing irrigation of toxic lands, which is not being considered). Monitoring has been significantly reduced and nobody really knows how much selenium is being discharged into the Bay-Delta from agricultural sources in the San Joaquin basin. Building a Peripheral Canal or Tunnel will increase the concentrations and residence time of selenium in the Bay-Delta because of decreased fresh clean water from the Sacramento (and Trinity) Rivers that will be diverted south before it gets to the Delta. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Environmental poison in San Francisco Bay could increase with Delta water plan By Mike Taugher Contra Costa Times Posted: 09/16/2011 05:45:32 AM PDT Updated: 09/16/2011 09:30:16 AM PDT Click photo to enlarge Research Hydrologist Robin Stewart measures an overbite clam, an invasive species,... (Dan Honda) 1 2 3 4 ? A naturally occurring poison responsible for one of the nation's worst wildlife disasters a quarter-century ago is a looming problem in San Francisco Bay -- one that could worsen if aqueducts are built around the Delta, new research suggests. The aqueducts could channel more selenium at higher concentrations into the bay, a possibility that has been largely overlooked in lengthy debates about Delta water, a top scientist said. "It's clearly a serious problem and it could get worse," said Sam Luoma, a former lead scientist for the state's bay-Delta water and environment programs who sits on a national panel reviewing Delta water plans. "I don't know why it hasn't gotten traction." Highly concentrated selenium from farm runoff killed or injured thousands of birds in the 1980s at the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge near Interstate 5 west of Merced. After photographs of dead and deformed birds appeared in newspapers and on television screens across the country, the wildlife refuge was declared a toxic dump and closed in 1987. Today, selenium from the Bay Area's oil refineries and the San Joaquin Valley's farms is diluted enough in the bay and Delta that it might not be a severe problem, except that it is concentrating in the flesh of invasive clams that infest the waterways' northern reaches, especially parts of San Pablo Bay, the Carquinez Strait and Suisun Bay. That's a problem for anything that eats the overbite clams, including ducks and sturgeon, one of the region's most popular sport fish. Sturgeon already have selenium levels near those associated with reproductive problems, and sturgeon populations have not flourished as one might expect given the number of clams available to eat, Luoma said. Still, it is difficult to decipher if the problem already is affecting fish, because weak or deformed fish usually are eaten before they can be documented. "If it gets worse, it will affect sturgeon," Luoma said. It is unclear whether ducks or other birds have been affected. The sprawling wetlands on the shores of the San Pablo and Suisun bays are important bird habitats, with the Suisun Marsh containing 10 percent of California's remaining wetlands in the West Coast's largest brackish water marsh. Recent studies by Luoma and others are building the case that despite dramatic reductions in selenium pollution from farms and refineries, the northern bay remains especially sensitive to it, due largely to the unwelcome overbite clam. "What it does show you is that we shouldn't be adding any more selenium into the system," said Eugenia McNaughton, manager of the quality assurance section at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's San Francisco office who has worked on selenium issues for years. "We need to get those numbers lower than they are right now." The developing information is another thorny challenge for plans to reconfigure Delta water deliveries. Big water agencies from the Bay Area to Southern California want to improve the reliability of their Delta water supplies by building tunnels or canals around the Delta. That could worsen San Francisco Bay's selenium problem because much of the selenium-tainted water that currently comes down the San Joaquin River -- the Delta's single largest source of selenium -- is taken up by pumps that recirculate San Joaquin water back to farms and cities. If new intakes on the Sacramento River replace, or partially replace, the Delta pumps, more selenium from the San Joaquin River could flow into the bay, and less Sacramento River water would be available to dilute pollution and push selenium through the estuary. "We're trading clean Sacramento River water and in return we're getting low-quality San Joaquin River water," Luoma said. No one knows how much more selenium would flow into the bay if Sacramento River water is diverted upstream of the Delta. State water officials are considering the issue in an ongoing study, said Karla Nemeth, a spokeswoman for Bay Delta Conservation Plan. "It is a subject of analysis in the environmental review documents," Nemeth wrote in an email this week. The full study she was referring to has not been publicly released, but government scientists who reviewed it last year were highly critical. Their objections led to numerous revisions that are continuing nearly a year after the study was supposed to be completed. A summary of an earlier draft acknowledges the water diversion could increase selenium toxicity for Sacramento splittail, a large minnow that eats clams. Selenium is a naturally occurring element found in crude oil and the ancient marine sediments of California's Coast Range. Selenium is one byproduct of crude oil that refineries discharge in wastewater. Irrigation leaches selenium out of the soil and brings it to the surface, where it gets into farm drainage water. A small amount of selenium is essential for people but too much is dangerous. The Delta selenium level is low enough that experts say drinking the water is safe for people. The only human threat would be to those who eat a lot of contaminated sturgeon or ducks. But for wildlife, selenium can be a bigger problem and it can quickly take a huge ecological toll. In 1983, highly concentrated selenium at Kesterson in the food web caused nearly two-thirds of the embryos and hatchlings of ducks and other water birds to die or hatch with deformities that year. In the bay, the threat remains even though refinery and selenium discharges from some parts of the San Joaquin Valley have been slashed. Refineries spent tens of millions of dollars to cut selenium releases, said Tupper Hull, spokesman for the Western States Petroleum Association. They appear to have dropped by about two-thirds since the late 1990s, state regulators say. "I think there's an acknowledgment that the refineries have done what's feasible to do," Hull said, adding they are not necessarily done. "This is an ongoing effort," he said. As the refineries reduced their discharges, the concentration of selenium in the estuary's clams declined until 2009, when it began rising again, said Robin Stewart, a researcher at the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park. It is unclear exactly why that happened, though it is possible the recent drought caused less water to flow through the bay, which in turn could have given clams more time to ingest selenium. Farmers in the northern San Joaquin Valley, meanwhile, say they have reduced selenium discharges by 87 percent since the 1990s, though progress toward a goal to eventually eliminate the discharges has been slower than planned. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20110915__ecct0916selenium~4_VIEWER.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 32775 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20110916_063229_16selenium_300.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 73482 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20110916_063208_selenium1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 65500 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Sep 20 14:18:15 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:18:15 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SJ Mercury-Salazar: Klamath dam removal will cost far less Message-ID: <4ECD1CB8-D742-47A6-895F-8EE02392890A@att.net> http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_18929674 Salazar: Klamath dam removal will cost far less By MARCUS WOHLSEN Associated Press Posted: 09/19/2011 12:37:46 PM PDT Updated: 09/19/2011 04:01:30 PM PDT SAN FRANCISCO?The cost of removing four dams on the Klamath River in California and Oregon will be far less than first believed, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Monday as he worked to rally support for several massive federal water projects. An environmental report to be released Thursday will show that the proposed removal project will cost about $290 million, not $450 million as initially estimated, Salazar told an audience at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco. "We today have real hope for a healthier basin and stronger economy on the Klamath," Salazar said. The dam removal proposed for 2020 is part of an agreement to restore historic salmon runs while maintaining irrigation for the region's farmers by dismantling the hydroelectric dams. Three of the dams are in Northern California and the fourth in Southern Oregon. More than 550,000 Oregon customers of Portland- based dam owner PacifiCorp are paying an extra 2 percent per month on their electric bills to cover the cost of dam removal. The utility's 40,000 California customers will soon start to see the same surcharge. The drastically lower cost will not mean lower utility bills for those customers, since PacifiCorp is on the hook for the first $200 million the removal will cost under the terms of the removal agreement, said Bob Gravely, a company spokesman. The state of California has agreed to cover any costs above the first $200 million. The dams generate enough electricity to power about 70,000 homes. PacifiCorp was confident alternate sources to make up for the loss power could be found by 2020, Gravely said. The draft environmental impact statement will show that removing the dams will cost about 50 jobs, all tied to generating electricity at the dams, Salazar said. Removing the dams would create about 4,600 jobs, including about 1,400 for the dam removal itself and between 70 and 695 farm jobs owing to a more reliable water supply, he said. An advocacy group for the region's farmers said they believed the number of farm jobs created by the dam removal would be even higher. "We believe that the draft EIS numbers underestimate the jobs and gross income that farming and ranching provides to the (Klamath) Basin," said farmer Steve Kandra in a statement issued by the group, Partnership to Restore Stability and Prosperity to the Region. The report will show that Coho salmon will reclaim nearly 70 miles of historical habitat and steelhead 420 miles, Salazar said. The secretary said he planned to make a final decision by March 2012 on how to proceed with the dam removal plan. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Sep 20 14:46:59 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:46:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?KlamBlog-Before_the_storm_=96_Behi?= =?windows-1252?q?nd_the_scenes?= Message-ID: <2566C8B2-3D64-4556-99CC-0049FB2FC47D@att.net> HTTP://KLAMBLOG.BLOGSPOT.COM/2011/09/BEFORE-STORM-BEHIND-SCENES.HTML MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2011 Before the storm ? Behind the scenes The Coming Storm In Klamath Country the late summer lull is about to end. As light wanes and nights become chill the Klamath River ? and its controversial Dam and Water Deals - are about to be in the national headlines again. Soon after the Fall Equinox the environmental report needed to ?inform? a decision on the Deals by Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar will come out in draft form. That will kick off a round of review, hearings, teach-ins, newspaper reports and attempts by promoters, opponents and those who favor key improvements to promote their different views on the Klamath Dam and Water Deals. For these extraordinary and perhaps unprecedented* Deals to work, however, and before the Secretary makes his decision, Congress must pass a bill authorizing the unusual Deals. According to at least one of the tribe?s promoting them (the Klamath Tribes), Congress will have to come up with the full price tag for the KBRA or Water Deal. That price tag is nearly $1 billion dollars over ten years. It is hard to imagine that legislation with a billion dollar price tag could make it through a divided and cash strapped Congress even if powerful forces were not opposed. And powerful forces are opposed including Northern California congressman Tom McClintock (R), the Hoopa Tribe, the basin?s Tea Party groups and (presumably) other federal tribes across the nation whose budgets would be raided to provide the tribal share of the ten-year price tag. Strange things can happen in Congress, however, when powerful interests stand to gain. In the Klamath case the big winners in theDeals are members of not one but three of the West?s most powerful interests: -- A Power Utility and its major investors -- Large private irrigation interests receiving taxpayer subsidized water from federal agencies -- Federal Land and Resource Agencies Warren Buffet: his investment company ? Berkshire-Hathaway ? owns PacifiCorp and five Klamath River Dams. When someone with the power and influence of a Warren Buffet want legislation to go through the US Congress, many obstacles can be overcome. Buffet?s Berkshire Hathaway owns PacifiCorp which owns the Klamath Dams. Compliance with all laws would make the dams a money loser and going the formal route to dam removal would cost investors/shareholders. The Dam Deal is a much cheaper alternative for PacifiCorp, Berkshire Hathaway and Buffet. All that means theDam Deal ? under which PacifiCorp?s customers and taxpayers will foot the total bill for dam removal ? has a good chance of making it through Congress one way or another. Klamath Irrigators got what they wanted in the Water Deal. If the deal is memorialized in federal legislation these irrigators will be first in line for Klamath Water ahead of at risk salmon and other private irrigators Whether the Water Deal remains part of the final legislative package is another story. Due to its cost and the controversy it has generated, prospects for it to be enacted as negotiated appear slim. The Bureau of Reclamation and the Irrigation Elite they serve will have a hard time holding on to the first-in-line-for-Klamath-water provisions they negotiated; the damage to non-federal irrigators is just too great. Even if some Water Deal provisions manage to remain in final Klamath dam removal legislation, however, there is a good chance Congress will make changes to those provisions. Those who want to fix theWater Deal, not kill it, have a good chance for success if they are organized, determined and can find champions in Congress for those changes. For example, a better guarantee of water for the Klamath Refuges and the basin-wide flow study recommended by the National Research Council in order to properly set in-river flows could become part of what emerges from Congress. Lower Klamath and Tule Lake NWRs - and the 80% of Pacific Flyway birds which rely upon them - are dependent on the Bureau of Reclamation and the Irrigation Elite for water supply The dewatered Scott River near Fort Jones on October 2, 2009. A basin-wide flow assessment would encompass major tributaries including the Scott, Shasta and Trinity. KlamBlog previously pointed out that the federal land and resource management agencies? the Bureaus of Reclamation and Land Management and the Forest , National Marine and National Wildlife Services - collectively known these days as the ?Federal Family? - are the real architects of the Klamath Deals. Key federal bureaucrats recognized years ago that the likelihood of dam removal (money loosing dams can?t survive relicensing) presented an opportunity to get back control of Klamath River Basin water management from the courts acting on behalf of salmon, fishermen and the federal tribes. The bureaucrats decided then to try to hitch a Water Deal which suited them to what would likely be a popular dam removal deal. Without changes, legislation implementing the Water Deal will provide federal bureaucrats with what they most desire ? the authority to manage water, land and resources professionally - that is, undemocratically - and out of the public eye. Whether Congress will go along with undemocratic Water Deal governance provisions, however, is not clear. Since the opening of the American West, federal bureaucrats have competed with locals for control of land, water and resources Historically, these federal agencies ? the Bureaus of Reclamation and Land Management and the Forest, National Marine and National Wildlife Services - have competed with westerners for control of water, land and resource management. As KlamBlog has pointed out before, The Water Deal provides for renewed federal dominance in Klamath water management. Under it decisions on how water is managed would be made by federal and tribal bureaucrats meeting behind closed doors. The alternative to federal back room management is the democratic basin-governance model which was originally championed by scientist and western explorer John Wesley Powell. We see the democratic model in operation today in traditional irrigation districts and in those river basins which have empowered and effective, all-party river commissions. The closest thing we have seen to that model proposed so far in the Klamath River Basin is Siskiyou County?s call for an open process to develop a basin-wide restoration plan. Behind the Scenes In advance of the coming legislative battle those who are promoting the Deals, those who oppose them, and those who want to fix what they consider fatal flaws are all active. The Two Rivers Tribune recently reported that draft legislation to implement the Dam and Water Deals is ?circulating in secret". The Hoopa Tribe is upset that the feds have not shared the draft bill with them and all other federal tribes which will be affected by it. Only those tribes and private parties which signed the Deals have been invited to review and comment on the draft; the Hoopa and Quartz Valley Tribes and the Resighini Rancheria have been denied the opportunity to review and comment. Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley and California Congressman Mike Thompson have reportedly agreed to sponsor the legislation. Key environmental constituents who have supported Mike Thompson in the past, have asked him to fix what they consider fatal flaws in the Dealsin any legislation he sponsors. There is no indication, however, that Thompson is consulting with these supporters. On the opposition side, Siskiyou County?s supervisors are in the midst of a major effort to get the federal agencies to ?consult? with them about Klamath River and all other land and resource management issues. Four deluded supervisors out of five apparently believe thatfederal managers must defer to their local radical right, anti-tribe sentiment. So far the county supervisors get lip service from theForest Service which dutifully appears when called but the National Marine Fisheries Service recently refused a similar demand for them to appear. Siskiyou County?s radical right supervisors appear convinced that Siskiyou voters will back their efforts to get the feds to defer to them on water, land and resource management. In the midst of cuts to most county services, they recently voted to pay lawyer Fred Kelly Grant $250 per hour to act as their ?coordination counsel?. A criminal lawyer by profession, in recent years Grant has worked for the property rights group Stewards of the Range which has now become American Stewards of Liberty. His current effort is promoted by an organization calling itself Trademark America. For an introduction to the network of interconnected property rights organizations see this link. While Grant forcefully presents legal arguments for a federal coordination requirement, he does not site nor has he apparently been involved with a single court case upholding a requirement that federal officials defer to county land and resource management plans and policies. Instead, Grant and the American Stewards of Liberty of which he is a part appear to be attempting to ride the Tea Party wave into a new era of county-level political resistance to state and federal authority. Meanwhile those who see much good in the Klamath Deals but also fatal flaws are organizing to secure the changes they say are needed. For these folks the devil is in critical details which they would like to see all affected citizens understand. The Redwood Chapter Sierra Club, the Environmental Protection Information Center, Northcoast Environmental Center and Redwood Chapter of the Audubon Society are sponsoring a teach-in on the Secretarial Determination Process, the Draft EIS/EIR to inform that decision and the issues which will arise when Klamath legislation is introduced in Congress. The teach-in will take place on Wednesday October 19th at the Warfinger Building in Eureka. Other educational efforts are also being planned. Informed Consent is a process which Indigenous Karuk-Yurok leader Chris Peters has stressed is missing from Dam and Water Dealprocesses. According to Peters - who is a member of the Yurok Tribe - when Indigenous water and other rights are involved, all tribal members should be fully informed and a majority of members should give their consent before the tribal governing body signs on. Oregon?s Klamath Tribes is the only tribal government to yet hold a referendum on the Deals. That tribe?s members voted to support the Deals which would provide them with the means to regain a land and resource base. Into the light KlamBlog has pointed out many times how and why secret and back room dealing has come to dominate Klamath River water, land, resource and restoration management and decision making. We have not hidden the fact that we see that dominance as morally, socially and environmentally wrong. Undemocratic, backroom management by any collection of entities is not in the interest of the Klamath River or Klamath Salmon. KlamBlog is a strong advocate for open, democratic and science-driven water management and restoration because it is the People?s right to see how public water and public resources are being managed. While back room dealing will no doubt continue, once the Draft EIS/EIR is released and Klamath Legislation is introduced into Congress essential decisions will have to be made in public. Finally, all those with an interest in the Klamath River will have an opportunity to understand what is at stake and the trade-offs their leaders have accepted. All citizens who have a stake will have the opportunity to weigh in as is their right; the Klamath is ? after all is said and done ? a public river. As public deliberations replace back room shenanigans KlamBlog will be there enthusiastically pushing for full disclosure, continuing to publicize what others seek to keep hidden and thereby seeking to empower citizens to get involved and to make a difference. It is likely to be a wild ride. ___________________________ * The unprecedented nature of the Dam and Water Deals may be the combination of a tribal water rights settlement (Klamath Tribes) with a dam removal deal. Tribal water rights settlements have been going on in the West since the 80s; for the most part, tribes have traded vast unperfected water rights for money and other considerations. History will not look kindly on this second great swindle of America?s Indigenous peoples. The proposed termination of the federal trust responsibility with respect to the rights of all six of the Basin?s federally recognized tribes ? whether or not they agree to that termination ? also appears to be unprecedented. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Warren+Buffett.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7342 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UpKlamBsnAg_7-2-01+%285%29.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41637 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Lower+Klamath+Sunset_001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 24025 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Scott+R+nr+Ft+Jones+10-2-09_001.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 47917 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: federal+bureaucracy.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6658 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Sep 20 14:51:17 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:51:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Secretary Salazar's Commonwealth Club Prepared Remarks Message-ID: <636EC7CA-46CA-46F0-BCCA-DB6184C110D3@att.net> Attached are the prepared remarks of Interior Secretary Kenneth Salazar for his 9/19/11 speech at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco. I understand there were other remarks made during Q & A that are not included here. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Salazar 09-18-11_Commonwealth Club_final.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 66571 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- From FISH1IFR at aol.com Tue Sep 20 15:23:38 2011 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:23:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:=20[env-trinity]=20KlamBlog-Before=20the=20storm=20?= =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=93=20Behind=20the=20scenes?= Message-ID: <7d9e7.55c17671.3baa6c6a@aol.com> Colleagues.... While Felice's analysis in this KlamBlog post is uniquely his own, is in my view seriously flawed in several places, or based on his increasingly obsolete information base (since he is now voluntarily "boycotting" all the Klamath Basin Coordinating Council (KBCC) public informational meetings), plus he tends to characterize any meeting he is not personally invited to as "secretive backroom dealings," his characterization of the next few weeks as a likely to be a "wild ride" is probably accurate. The Draft EIS for Klamath Dam Removal, together with a very careful and thorough cost analysis of dam removal itself, will be coming out on the official web site sometime tomorrow (_www.klamathrestoration.gov_ (http://www.klamathrestoration.gov) ) together with ALL the many and detailed study reports on which that DEIS is based. Interior Secretary Salazar gave an important speech in SF on Sept. 19th in which he summarized some of the findings on dam removal under the Klamath Settlement Agreement coming out in the DEIS. The relevant Klamath portion of that speech is attached below. These are benefits from both the two components of the Klamath Settlement Agreement -- the hydropower only Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA), and the "related program" also analyzed under NEPA of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA). Without the KBRA many of those benefits -- such as a guaranteed water supply for the National Wildlife Refuges and up to 230,000 more acre-feet of water back into the river for salmon recovery -- would not exist even with the dams removed. Though it is a necessary pre-condition, Klamath dam removal alone will not bring back the Klamath's once mighty salmon runs nor put more water back into the river. It is for this reason that PCFFA supports both Agreements. ============================================= Glen H. Spain, NW Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 O:(541)689-2000 -- Fax:(541)689-2500 Email: fish1ifr at aol.com Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) ======================================================== Klamath portion of interior Secretary Salazar's Speech Today in SF on west water issues, this section on the impacts of Klamath Dam removal. The formal Draft EIS/EIR will be released this Thursday (9/21st). Klamath River Basin First, in the Klamath River Basin, severe drought and strain on the system exploded in 2001 with water shortages for agriculture and other users. It was followed in 2002 by the largest fish die off in the Basin?s history, if not in U.S. history. After years of litigation, the parties reached an agreement, signed in early 2010. Under that agreement, the parties are to undertake a comprehensive environmental and economic analysis of the impacts of removing four dams on the Klamath River. The agreement, which the Obama Administration stands behind fully, sets up an open, transparent process for choosing the best path for the Klamath Basin. Science and public engagement are at the heart of the process. That?s why, for the past several months, the Department has been publicly releasing the individual science reports as they become final. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement, which compliments these scientific studies, will be available for public review and comment beginning Thursday. The analysis and studies will say a few things. First, they will show there are pluses and minuses to dam removal on the Klamath River. The studies estimate that dam removal would result in the loss of hydroelectric power generation and the loss of around 50 jobs from managing those facilities. It would also result in the loss of some recreational opportunities on the Klamath River reservoirs, and some decrease in property values for landowners nearby. On the other hand, the watershed-wide restoration program that is proposed could add more than 4,600 jobs to the regional economy over 15 years, including around 1,400 during the year of dam removal. The studies say that the reliability in water supplies that would be gained would boost gross farm income and add between 70 and 695 jobs annually to the agricultural economy. Moreover, Klamath restoration would help address tribal trust issues for the Klamath River Basin Tribes and would be beneficial to their water quality, fisheries, and traditional cultural practices. The analysis also suggests there would be benefits to commercial salmon fishermen. It seems like more often than not in the last decade, there have been salmon fishery closures in California or Oregon. With removal of the dams, though: ? coho would reclaim 68 miles of historical habitat; ? steelhead, the Klamath River?s most popular sport fishery, would regain 420 miles of historical habitat; and ? commercially harvested Chinook salmon production would increase by more than 80 percent . All together, eleven coastal counties in Oregon and California would see gains of more than 400 jobs as a result of improved fishing conditions. Those are significant numbers. But we will also be looking closely at the cost of the restoration. The analysis that will be available Thursday will show that the most probable cost of removing the four dams is around $290 million in 2020 dollars, which is below the $450 million state cost cap identified in the KHSA. To date, we have maintained a very public process. But we need the continued input of the public and local communities on the draft EIS. Their voices ? and all of the economic, environmental, and scientific information we have gathered - will be critical as I approach my decision on dam removal in the Klamath River Basin in March, 2012. ==================================================================== In a message dated 9/20/2011 2:52:29 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: _http://klamblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/before-storm-behind-scenes.html_ (http://klamblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/before-storm-behind-scenes.html) MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2011 Before the storm ? Behind the scenes The Coming Storm In Klamath Country the late summer lull is about to end. As light wanes and nights become chill the Klamath River ? and its controversial Dam and Water Deals - are about to be in the national headlines again. Soon after the Fall Equinox the environmental report needed to ?inform? a decision on the Deals by Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar will come out in draft form. That will kick off a round of review, hearings, teach-ins, newspaper reports and attempts by promoters, opponents and those who favor key improvements to promote their different views on the Klamath Dam and Water Deals. For these extraordinary and perhaps unprecedented* Deals to work, however, and before the Secretary makes his decision, Congress must pass a bill authorizing the unusual Deals. According to at least one of the tribe?s promoting them (the Klamath Tribes), Congress will have to come up with the _full price tag_ (http://www.capitalpress.com/mobile/TH-klamath-update-w-photos-infobox-091611) for the KBRA or Water Deal. That price tag is nearly $1 billion dollars over ten years. It is hard to imagine that legislation with a billion dollar price tag could make it through a divided and cash strapped Congress even if powerful forces were not opposed. And powerful forces are opposed including Northern California congressman Tom McClintock (R), the Hoopa Tribe, the basin?s Tea Party groups and (presumably) other federal tribes across the nation whose budgets would be raided to provide the tribal share of the ten-year price tag. Strange things can happen in Congress, however, when powerful interests stand to gain. In the Klamath case the big winners in theDeals are members of not one but three of the West?s most powerful interests: -- A Power Utility and its major investors -- Large private irrigation interests receiving taxpayer subsidized water from federal agencies -- Federal Land and Resource Agencies (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dSU31cxG6GQ/TneSgyUlZTI/AAAAAAAAASU/4dmx5vJ8GLw/s1600/Warren+Buffett.jpg) Warren Buffet: his investment company ? Berkshire-Hathaway ? owns PacifiCorp and five Klamath River Dams. When someone with the power and influence of a Warren Buffet want legislation to go through the US Congress, many obstacles can be overcome. Buffet? s Berkshire Hathaway owns PacifiCorp which owns the Klamath Dams. Compliance with all laws would make the dams a money loser and going the formal route to dam removal would cost investors/shareholders. The Dam Deal is a much cheaper alternative for PacifiCorp, Berkshire Hathaway and Buffet. All that means theDam Deal ? under which PacifiCorp?s customers and taxpayers will foot the total bill for dam removal ? has a good chance of making it through Congress one way or another. (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MqKq359Hu3I/TneT3tnIHLI/AAAAAAAAASY/5jlMu_msAlY/s1600/UpKlamBsnAg_7-2-01+%285%29.jpg) Klamath Irrigators got what they wanted in the Water Deal. If the deal is memorialized in federal legislation these irrigators will be first in line for Klamath Water ahead of at risk salmon and other private irrigators Whether the Water Deal remains part of the final legislative package is another story. Due to its cost and the controversy it has generated, prospects for it to be enacted as negotiated appear slim. The Bureau of Reclamation and the _Irrigation Elite_ (http://klamblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/meet-klamath-river-basins-irrigation.html) they serve will have a hard time holding on to the first-in-line-for-Klamath-water provisions they negotiated; the damage to non-federal irrigators is just too great. Even if some Water Deal provisions manage to remain in final Klamath dam removal legislation, however, there is a good chance Congress will make changes to those provisions. Those who want to fix theWater Deal, not kill it, have a good chance for success if they are organized, determined and can find champions in Congress for those changes. For example, a better guarantee of water for the Klamath Refuges and the _basin-wide flow study_ (http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1528811269/National-Research-Council-Basin-wide- study-needed-to-assess-water-flows-in-Klamath) recommended by the National Research Council in order to properly set in-river flows could become part of what emerges from Congress. (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nP0d9UoYMdU/TneZfaXLU3I/AAAAAAAAASg/-Uz6TMcOhvY/s1600/Lower+Klamath+Sunset_001.jpg) Lower Klamath and Tule Lake NWRs - and the 80% of Pacific Flyway birds which rely upon them - are dependent on the Bureau of Reclamation and the Irrigation Elite for water supply (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wwpyN1PWtjg/TnebWaX0WfI/AAAAAAAAASk/nZkavEs9ZZU/s1600/Scott+R+nr+Ft+Jones+10-2-09_001.JPG) The dewatered Scott River near Fort Jones on October 2, 2009. A basin-wide flow assessment would encompass major tributaries including the Scott, Shasta and Trinity. KlamBlog previously pointed out that the federal land and resource management agencies? the Bureaus of Reclamation and Land Management and the Forest , National Marine and National Wildlife Services - collectively known these days as the ?Federal Family? - are the real architects of the Klamath Deals. Key federal bureaucrats recognized years ago that the likelihood of dam removal (money loosing dams can?t survive relicensing) presented an opportunity to get back control of Klamath River Basin water management from the courts acting on behalf of salmon, fishermen and the federal tribes. The bureaucrats decided then to try to hitch a Water Deal which suited them to what would likely be a popular dam removal deal. Without changes, legislation implementing the Water Deal will provide federal bureaucrats with what they most desire ? the authority to manage water, land and resources professionally - that is, undemocratically - and out of the public eye. Whether Congress will go along with undemocratic Water Deal governance provisions, however, is not clear. (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qh9eaChDQfc/Tneqk0klO9I/AAAAAAAAASw/zjhqzLITpas/s1600/federal+bureaucracy.jpg) Since the opening of the American West, federal bureaucrats have competed with locals for control of land, water and resources Historically, these federal agencies ? the Bureaus of Reclamation and Land Management and the Forest, National Marine and National Wildlife Services - have competed with westerners for control of water, land and resource management. As KlamBlog has pointed out before, The Water Deal provides for renewed federal dominance in Klamath water management. Under it decisions on how water is managed would be made by federal and tribal bureaucrats meeting behind closed doors. The alternative to federal back room management is the _democratic basin-governance model _ (http://bigthink.com/ideas/24964) which was originally championed by scientist and western explorer John Wesley Powell. We see the democratic model in operation today in traditional irrigation districts and in those river basins which have empowered and effective, all-party river commissions. The closest thing we have seen to that model proposed so far in the Klamath River Basin is Siskiyou County?s call for an open process to develop a basin-wide restoration plan. Behind the Scenes In advance of the coming legislative battle those who are promoting the Deals, those who oppose them, and those who want to fix what they consider fatal flaws are all active. The Two Rivers Tribune recently _reported _ (http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/08/klamath-bill-circulating-in-secret/) that draft legislation to implement the Dam and Water Deals is ?circulating in secret". The Hoopa Tribe is upset that the feds have not shared the draft bill with them and all other federal tribes which will be affected by it. Only those tribes and private parties which signed the Deals have been invited to review and comment on the draft; the Hoopa and Quartz Valley Tribes and the Resighini Rancheria have been denied the opportunity to review and comment. Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley and California Congressman Mike Thompson have reportedly agreed to sponsor the legislation. Key environmental constituents who have supported Mike Thompson in the past, have asked him to fix what they consider fatal flaws in the Dealsin any legislation he sponsors. There is no indication, however, that Thompson is consulting with these supporters. On the opposition side, Siskiyou County?s supervisors are in the midst of a major effort to get the federal agencies to ?consult? with them about Klamath River and all other land and resource management issues. Four deluded supervisors out of five apparently believe that_federal managers must defer_ (http://users.sisqtel.net/armstrng/opinion091311.html) to their local radical right, anti-tribe sentiment. So far the county supervisors get lip service from the_Forest Service _ (http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1249731927/County-KNF-meet-to-discuss-travel-management-policies) which dutifully appears when called but the National Marine Fisheries Service recently _refused a similar demand_ (http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/lifestyle/agriculture/x351390313/National-Marine-Fisheries-Service-a-no-show) for them to appear. Siskiyou County?s radical right supervisors appear convinced that Siskiyou voters will back their efforts to get the feds to defer to them on water, land and resource management. In the midst of cuts to most county services, they recently voted to pay lawyer _Fred Kelly Grant_ (http://justicemyass.com/id1.html) $250 per hour to act as their ?coordination counsel?. A criminal lawyer by profession, in recent years Grant has worked for the property rights group Stewards of the Range which has now become _American Stewards of Liberty_ (https://www.americanstewards.us/) . His current effort is promoted by an organization calling itself _Trademark America_ (http://www.trademarkamerica.org/34.html) . For an introduction to the network of interconnected property rights organizations see _this link_ (http://www.pollutionissues.com/Pl-Re/Property-Rights-Movement.html) . While Grant forcefully presents _legal arguments_ (http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/grant_How_Coordination_Plans_Work.html) for a federal coordination requirement, he does not site nor has he apparently been involved with a single court case upholding a requirement that federal officials defer to county land and resource management plans and policies. Instead, Grant and the American Stewards of Liberty of which he is a part appear to be attempting to ride the Tea Party wave into a new era of county-level political resistance to state and federal authority. Meanwhile those who see much good in the Klamath Deals but also fatal flaws are organizing to secure the changes they say are needed. For these folks the devil is in critical details which they would like to see all affected citizens understand. The Redwood Chapter Sierra Club, the Environmental Protection Information Center, Northcoast Environmental Center and Redwood Chapter of the Audubon Society are sponsoring a teach-in on the Secretarial Determination Process, the Draft EIS/EIR to inform that decision and the issues which will arise when Klamath legislation is introduced in Congress. The teach-in will take place on Wednesday October 19th at the Warfinger Building in Eureka. Other educational efforts are also being planned. _Informed Consent_ (http://www.globalforestcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Short-Guide-to-Indigenous-Peoples-Rights.pdf) is a process which Indigenous Karuk-Yurok leader Chris Peters has stressed is missing from Dam and Water Dealprocesses. According to Peters - who is a member of the Yurok Tribe - when Indigenous water and other rights are involved, all tribal members should be fully informed and a majority of members should give their consent before the tribal governing body signs on. Oregon?s Klamath Tribes is the only tribal government to yet hold a referendum on the Deals. That tribe?s members voted to support the Deals which would provide them with the means to regain a land and resource base. Into the light KlamBlog has pointed out many times how and why secret and back room dealing has come to dominate Klamath River water, land, resource and restoration management and decision making. We have not hidden the fact that we see that dominance as morally, socially and environmentally wrong. Undemocratic, backroom management by any collection of entities is not in the interest of the Klamath River or Klamath Salmon. KlamBlog is a strong advocate for open, democratic and science-driven water management and restoration because it is the People?s right to see how public water and public resources are being managed. While back room dealing will no doubt continue, once the Draft EIS/EIR is released and Klamath Legislation is introduced into Congress essential decisions will have to be made in public. Finally, all those with an interest in the Klamath River will have an opportunity to understand what is at stake and the trade-offs their leaders have accepted. All citizens who have a stake will have the opportunity to weigh in as is their right; the Klamath is ? after all is said and done ? a public river. As public deliberations replace back room shenanigans KlamBlog will be there enthusiastically pushing for full disclosure, continuing to publicize what others seek to keep hidden and thereby seeking to empower citizens to get involved and to make a difference. It is likely to be a wild ride. ___________________________ * The unprecedented nature of the Dam and Water Deals may be the combination of a tribal water rights settlement (Klamath Tribes) with a dam removal deal. Tribal water rights settlements have been going on in the West since the 80s; for the most part, tribes have traded vast unperfected water rights for money and other considerations. History will not look kindly on this second great swindle of America?s Indigenous peoples. The_ proposed termination of the federal trust responsibility _ (http://digital.law.washington.edu/dspace-law/bitstream/handle/1773.1/1043/1WJELP042.pdf?sequence=4) with respect to the rights of all six of the Basin?s federally recognized tribes ? whether or not they agree to that termination ? also appears to be unprecedented. = -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Warren+Buffett.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7342 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UpKlamBsnAg_7-2-01+%285%29.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41637 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Lower+Klamath+Sunset_001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 24025 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Scott+R+nr+Ft+Jones+10-2-09_001.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 47917 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: federal+bureaucracy.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6658 bytes Desc: not available URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Tue Sep 20 16:25:27 2011 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:25:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] KlamBlog-Before the storm =?UTF-8?B?4oCTIEJlaGk=?= =?UTF-8?B?bmQgdGhlIHNjZW5lcw==?= In-Reply-To: <7d9e7.55c17671.3baa6c6a@aol.com> References: <7d9e7.55c17671.3baa6c6a@aol.com> Message-ID: <4E7920E7.5020906@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 7342 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 41637 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 24025 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 47917 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 6658 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Sep 20 16:37:09 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:37:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update September 20, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all, Our Trinity River mainstem spawning surveys are underway. Our first within-season update for the 2011 redd survey is available from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Website at the link below. Click on "Trinity River 2011 Redd Survey Update" near the bottom of the page. We'll continue to make updates available at this same site throughout the season. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/projectUpdates.html We've mapped 19 redds so far. Next week I'll begin to provide Google Earth files of mapped redds along with our weekly update. Our crews report seeing MANY adults and jacks in the river. Here's to hoping for a great run. Cheers! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 21 07:37:19 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 07:37:19 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard- Salazar on Klamath dams removal Message-ID: Salazar: Klamath dam removal cheaper than forecast; Interior secretary's remarks spark optimism among stakeholders http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18934584?source=rss Thadeus Greenson/The Times-Standard Posted: 09/20/2011 02:40:18 AM PDT Interior Secretary Ken Salazar made his first public comments on an agreement to remove Klamath River dams Monday, and the result was music to stakeholders' ears. Addressing the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco just days before the removal project's critical Draft Environmental Statement was due to be released, Salazar offered a brief preview of the document, saying studies indicate removal of the dams will benefit the environment, bolster fish populations, create jobs and be a lot cheaper than initially thought. It's the last part that perked a lot of ears. ?One of the fears that I've had and others have had is if we would come in below the cap and, according to Salazar, indeed we will,? said Craig Tucker, spokesman for the Karuk Tribe, referring to the $450 million cost cap outlined in the removal agreement that he and two dozen other groups drafted and signed in February 2010. PacifiCorp spokesman Bob Gravely said Salazar's estimated $290 million cost to remove the dams is good news for the company, whose 550,000 Oregon customers are paying an extra 2 percent per month on their electric bills to cover $200 million of the removal costs. Under the removal agreement -- which necessitated compromise from dam owner PacifiCorp, fishermen, farmers, environmentalists and tribes, many of which had spent years in conflict -- the parties were tasked with providing a comprehensive environmental and economic analysis of the impacts of removing the four Klamath River dams. A Draft Environmental Statement -- a key component of that process -- is due out Thursday, and Salazar's speech Monday was widely viewed by stakeholders as being a preview of that statement. Salazar said there are positives and negatives associated with dam removal, but the bulk of his remarks focused squarely on the positive. ?We today have real hope for a healthier basin and stronger economy on the Klamath,? he said. While the removals could result in a decrease in property values for some landowners and the loss of some recreational opportunities, Salazar said the environmental statement will show that dam removal would reclaim 68 miles of historical coho salmon habitat and 420 miles of steelhead habitat and could increase commercially harvested chinook salmon production by more than 80 percent. Glen Spain, spokesman for the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, said that's great news. ?That is a lot of jobs and a lot of families with incomes that we haven't seen in a long time,? he said. Salazar also spent much of his comments Monday focusing on the economic impacts of removing the dams. While the removals would result in 50 dam management jobs being lost, Salazar said, the proposed ?watershedwide? restoration program could add more than 4,600 jobs to the area over 15 years, including 1,400 during the physical dam removal. Further, Salazar said, studies indicate that increased reliability in water supplies could also boost farm income, adding between 70 and 695 jobs annually to the agricultural economy. Becky Hyde, a rancher in the upper Klamath basin and board member of the Upper Klamath Water Users Association, said she thinks those estimates are conservative. ?Up in our neck of the woods, agriculture contributes about $600 million to the region's economy,? she said. ?These agreements stabilize that economy.? Spain said Salazar's comments didn't come as a surprise to those familiar with the issues on the Klamath. ?All in all, I think what we see is confirmation of what many of us have been saying for years, which is, 'it's time for those dams to go,'? he said. ?And it not only makes sense for salmon, but it make sense for the regional economy.? Salazar is slated to make a final decision on whether the dam removal plan is in the public's best interest in March 2012. In the meantime -- watching the environmental statement process unfold -- stakeholders are hoping to get federal legislation in place paving the way for the dams' removal. Hyde said she and other stakeholders have been working with Sen. Jeff Merkeley, D-Ore., on draft legislation to be introduced at some point in the future. Salazar's comments underscoring the economic benefit of the dams' removal may help grease legislative wheels in Washington during a politically contentious time, stakeholders said. ?We think we're politically agnostic on the Klamath,? said Tucker. ?We're about solving problems, and it's not about Democrats and Republicans. It's about farmers and fishermen and tribes.? Tucker said he's watched the cantankerous climate on the Klamath change over the years from one in which people were at each others' throats to the present climate, where farmers bring potatoes and horseradish to stakeholder meetings and head home with salmon. ?I think they're becoming neighbors, and I think people are realizing we're one basin with a shared destiny,? he said. ?If we work together, that destiny will be positive.? Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or tgreenson at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 21 07:51:45 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 07:51:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding Record Searchlight- Cook, Kobseff not swayed by official's speech Message-ID: Cook, Kobseff not swayed by official's speech By Ryan Sabalow Posted September 19, 2011 at 11:47 p.m. http://www.redding.com/news/2011/sep/19/supervisors-doubt-dam-removal-plan/?partner=RSS Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar said Monday the benefits of removing dams on the Klamath River appear to far outweigh the negatives, and he called those who continue to oppose the removal plans naysayers set on derailing a hard-fought deal. At a speech in San Francisco, President Barack Obama's natural resources chief said federal officials have been reviewing reports detailing what exactly the proposed dam removals would mean for the river and the surrounding communities. He said the analysis, which will be made public Thursday, shows the costs of removing the dams is about $160 million cheaper than originally projected. The dam removals also would be a major boon to the river's health and for the coho and chinook salmon and steelhead that swim upstream. That, in turn, would benefit commercial fishermen and American Indian tribes who rely on the species, he said. In addition, Salazar said, dam removal would create close to 4,600 jobs over 15 years, help agriculture and bolster the surrounding economy. "Those are significant numbers," Salazar said. But a pair of Siskiyou County supervisors, whose board has voted to oppose removing the dams, and U.S. Rep. Wally Herger, R-Chico, said Monday that Salazar said nothing to dampen their concerns, and they question whether the fisheries science and job numbers are being manipulated to support a foregone conclusion that dam removal is a good idea. "He said it would be adding more than 4,600 jobs to the regional economy. Where?" said Supervisor Michael Kobseff. "It sounds too good to be true because it is." Kobseff and Supervisor Jim Cook say they also doubt Salazar's claims that pulling the dams down would help farmers in the area, because the dams help regulate needed irrigation water. They say Salazar also downplayed other negatives, including the loss of hydroelectric power and 50 dam-worker jobs and the decrease in property values of those living near the reservoirs. "Our public in Siskiyou County, we feel like we've been ignored," Cook said. Herger and fellow Republican Rep. Tom McClintock of Fair Oaks oppose the removal, saying the regions needs the hydroelectric power the dams produce. Last month, Herger sent a letter to Salazar attached to a Los Angeles Times story. The article reported that independent scientists had found holes in the dam-removal plan, calling it a $1.4 billion "experiment with no guarantee of success." Meanwhile, Salazar's speech and the reports he described were applauded by tribal authorities and fishing groups. "With grass-roots support from agricultural, conservation and fishing communities as well as industry, this is exactly the kind of job-creation plan Congress should embrace," said S. Craig Tucker, the Klamath campaign coordinator for the Karuk Tribe. Glen H. Spain, the northwest regional director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, agreed. "So far all the indications are that dam removal will cost a lot less than originally thought, will provide huge economic benefits to the region including some 4,600 additional jobs, and would save PacifiCorp's customers a bundle of money to boot," he said. "This is a win-win situation on nearly every front, and all the studies say that any downsides can be mitigated and controlled." Built between 1908 and 1962, the dams ? three in Siskiyou County and one in Oregon ? produce enough power for 70,000 homes, but they cut off up to 420 miles of salmon and steelhead spawning habitat. Last year more than 40 groups, including some farmers, environmentalists and American Indian tribes, signed an agreement to explore taking out the dams. "The agreement, which the Obama administration stands behind fully, sets up an open, transparent process for choosing the best path for the Klamath Basin," Salazar said in his speech. "Science and public engagement are at the heart of the process." Salazar said he's still gathering input on the proposal, and he won't make a final decision until March 2012. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Thu Sep 22 10:32:24 2011 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 10:32:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] KlamBlog-Before the storm =?UTF-8?B?4oCTIEJlaGk=?= =?UTF-8?B?bmQgdGhlIHNjZW5lcw==?= In-Reply-To: <7d9e7.55c17671.3baa6c6a@aol.com> References: <7d9e7.55c17671.3baa6c6a@aol.com> Message-ID: <4E7B7128.7010009@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 7342 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 41637 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 24025 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 47917 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 6658 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Sep 22 10:42:15 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 10:42:15 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher- Salazar admits peripheral canal could lead to more water exports References: <1316712498.23950.YahooMailNeo@web46210.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Dan Bacher To: Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 9:26 AM Subject: Salazar admits peripheral canal could lead to more water exports http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/09/21/salazar-admits-peripheral-canal-could-lead-to-more-water-exports/ Photo of Ken Salazar courtesy of U.S. Department of Interior. salazar_portrait_small.jpg Salazar admits peripheral canal could lead to more water exports by Dan Bacher The latest Restore the Delta newsletter (http://restorethedelta.org/1286) states, "Salazar got so many things wrong about the Delta that it's hard to know where to start," in referring to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's remarks at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco on September 19. I think that accurately summarizes Salazar's presentation on the Delta, a shameless promotion of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build a peripheral canal that former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, the worst Governor in California history, would be proud of. ?The Bay Delta Conservation Plan is the most important ? and most complex ? long-term water and habitat management plan ever undertaken,? Salazar gushed. ?The BDCP provides a comprehensive approach that includes new habitat for endangered fish species, coordinated measures to attack toxics that are fouling delta waters, and improvements to the state?s water infrastructure." However, in the question and answer period after his talk, Salazar revealed the true purpose of the BDCP and the peripheral canal: to increase water exports. Salazar suggested the possibility of "extending" or "expanding" exports to accommodate a growing population. "He talked about working with others in Colorado to defeat a water grab there," according to Restore the Delta. "But in the Q&A session following his address, Salazar said building a new aqueduct around the Delta might increase the flexibility of water operations in such a way that it could lead to more water deliveries. Apparently he doesn't see any similarity between a water grab in Colorado and a water grab in California." While claiming that Delta advocates' fears that the BDCP is a "water grab" were "unfounded," Salazar admitted that the "flexibility" of the new conveyance could lead to greater exports, in other words, to a "water grab!" If this isn't a classic case of political double-speak and cognitive dissonance, I don't know what is! (http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_18929472?source=rss) Venturing even further into the Theatre of Political Absurdity, Salazar claimed, "We're not taking shortcuts on the science" - while the overwhelming scientific evidence from federal, state and independent biologists points to the key role that Delta water exports play in the unprecedented decline of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail and other imperiled fish species. There is a direct correlation between fish declines and increases in water exports; to deny this is deny reality. It is impossible, now matter how much fake "habitat restoration" is done by the Obama and Brown administrations to greenwash the canal, to increase water exports to southern California water agencies and corporate agribusiness without seeing further fish declines. One of the most comical comments uttered by Salazar was, "We have to remain faithful to the open, collaborative and transparent process that brought the Bay Delta stakeholders together in the first place." Does Salazar live in a parallel universe or what? The BCDP process is one of the least "open, collaborative and transparent" government boondoggles that I've ever encountered. For example, the BDCP "Management Committee" has completely excluded Delta residents, family farmers, recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, California Indian Tribes, environmental justice communities and grassroots conservationists. What type of "open, collaborative and tranparent" process is this? Caleen Sisk-Franco, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu (McCloud River) Tribe, blasted Salazar as being a tool of big corporate interests - "big corporations' little thinkers." That's exactly what he is - a politician serving corporate agribusiness, southern California water agencies, development interests and water privateers such as Stewart Resnick, the owner of the giant Paramount Farms, not the people of California, fish or the environment. "So Salazar thinks this is the 'Granddaddy' of California water puzzles?" said Sisk-Franco. "This is just another example of big corporations' little thinkers influencing the top, who influence the law makers to do the wrong thing for most of the people and environment. We can't afford those kind of hair brained idiot mistakes now!" As Salazar spoke, one of the biggest fish kills in California history continued. The state and federal government agencies "salvaged" a total of 11,158,021 fish in the Delta water pumping facilities between January 1 and September 7, 2011, the result of record water exports. A horrific 8,985,009 Sacramento splittail, the largest number ever recorded, were salvaged during this period, according to Department of Fish and Game data (http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/node/9352). The salvage numbers also list 35,560 chinook salmon, 1,642 steelhead, 51 Delta smelt and 14 green sturgeon - all endangered or threatened species. The CalFed program mandated the construction of the state of the art fish screens a decade ago, but the screens have still not been installed. If they won't build these screens, do we we really expect them to comply with the laws protecting fish and environment if they build the canal? Rather than fast-tracking the construction of the peripheral canal, Salazar and his counterpart in the Brown administration, Natural Resources Secretary John Laird, should do something NOW to stop the massive fish kill in the Delta pumps! The Salazar speech including the questions and answers is on iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/commonwealth-club-climate/id296762605. For more information about Restore the Delta, go to: http://www.restorethedelta.org. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: salazar_portrait_small.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 37387 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Sep 22 14:58:41 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 14:58:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] News Clips on Klamath Dam Removal EIS Message-ID: There are just too many to post, so here are the url's for the story of the day on release of the Draft EIS/EIR for removal of the Klamath Dams: SF Chronicle's Peter Fimrite writes about the new report from DOI on Klamath dam removal http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/22/BAAF1L7JB1.DTL Boxall's LA Times story on the same subject - http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-klamath-salmon-20110922,0,6500733.story Eureka Times Standard does a thorough story on the subject - http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18951905?source=rss Siskiyou locals question accuracy of property value estimates relating to dam removal - http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x985872780/Klamath-dams-Real-estate-repercussions Redding Record Searchlight article- http://www.redding.com/news/2011/sep/21/report-details-dam-plans/?partner=RSS Department of Interior Press Release- http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/Salazar-Announces-Release-of-Klamath-Dam-Removal-Studies.cfm Congressman McClintock?s House floor remarks in opposition to Klamath Dam removal http://aquafornia.com/archives/54896#more-54896 The Draft EIS/EIR- http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR/download-draft-eis-eir -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Sat Sep 24 21:25:37 2011 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 00:25:37 -0400 (EDT) Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:=20[env-trinity]=20KlamBlog-Before=20the=20storm=20?= =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=93=20Behind=20the=20scenes?= Message-ID: <291c7.9249419.3bb00741@aol.com> In a message dated 9/22/2011 10:32:36 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, t.schlosser at msaj.com writes: We should all look carefully at the Klamath DEIS to see if it confirms Glen's claim that KBRA provides "up to 230,000 more acre-feet of water back into the river for salmon recovery " I think you'll find that it says: "Water Diversion Limitations would be implemented during dry years to increase flows for fisheries by reducing Reclamation?s Klamath Project diversion upstream of approximately 100,000 acre-feet." e.g., page 3.8-20. Tom.... You have misunderstood me. The additional water available to salmon use during the non-winter months under the KBRA include much more than just that "up to 100,000 acre-feet" from the Water Diversion Limitations on the Klamath Project. To be more precise, the KBRA provides for: (1) Up to 100,000 acre-feet additional water, as compared to a baseline of actual Project usage 1960-2000, from the Project through the "Diversion Limitation." This would hit maximum in dry years, when the fish need it most (but under past Project practices, when irrigators got the most instead, thus exacerbating every drought for fish), but in wet years (when there is plenty of water) would be much less water savings. This Project reduction, as you know, is scaled so that the TOTAL MAXIMUM Project diversion remains between 330,000 af and 385,000, the actual Limitation based on annual rainfall. Assuring more water for fish during any future drought is VERY important as a major benefit from the KBRA. (KBRA Sec. 15.1) (2) Plus the addition to the total UKL water supply from above-Project water users of a target of 30,000 additional acre-feet, through voluntary water right retirements and such measures... and this has to be verifiable additional water, not "paper water" as you claim (KBRA Sec 16.2.2 -- Off Project Water Use Retirement Program). (3) Capturing, through the restoration of additional wetlands (Willamson Delta, Agency Lake Ranch and Barnes Ranch, and Wood River Projects), enough new storage calculated to collectively produce an additional 108,570 gross acre-feet of storage next to Upper Klamath Lake -- water that would ultimately be available to flow into Upper Klamath Lake and then downriver, since it has nowhere else to go. I round this down to an additional 100,000 acre-feet of storage capacity added to the system, as restored wetlands (thus also a benefit to the wildlife refuges and waterfowl). True, this is water that would otherwise have flowed down in the winter floods for lack of anywhere to store it, but under the KBRA it will instead be shifted back to being available( by being naturally stored) over the part of the year where it is most useful to augment spring, summer and fall flows for salmon. (See KBRA Sec. 18.2). I would also note that if, for any reason, any of these projects becomes unfeasible, something of equivalent storage will be developed elsewhere in the upper basin (KBRA Sec. 18.2.5 -- Alternatives). Added together this means that 100,000 + 30,000 + up to 100,000 = up to 230,000 additional acre-feet of water per year will be available for salmon in-stream as a result full implementation of the KBRA. The model that predicts this, by the way, is a much used model that has been multiply peer reviewed, validated, and is used in many other basins. And its output results have been corroborated by a differently construct and independent USGS model to within a very few percent in all time steps. Since you raised the crediblity of my numbers, the above explanation seemed warranted. I generally try hard to have my facts straight whenever I post to public, or private, email forums, and owed you and the other participants in this forum a thoughtful response. I do not "shoot from the hip" as so many seem to do, in email or otherwise. ============================================= Glen H. Spain, NW Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 O:(541)689-2000 -- Fax:(541)689-2500 Email: fish1ifr at aol.com Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Sun Sep 25 11:01:21 2011 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 11:01:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] KlamBlog-Before the storm =?UTF-8?B?4oCTIEJlaGk=?= =?UTF-8?B?bmQgdGhlIHNjZW5lcw==?= In-Reply-To: <291c7.9249419.3bb00741@aol.com> References: <291c7.9249419.3bb00741@aol.com> Message-ID: <4E7F6C71.9080600@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Sun Sep 25 07:23:23 2011 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 07:23:23 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Appeal-Democrat column: Salmon are back In-Reply-To: <291c7.9249419.3bb00741@aol.com> References: <291c7.9249419.3bb00741@aol.com> Message-ID: OFF THE HOOK: Salmon are back Comments 0 September 24, 2011 11:12:33 PM Dan Bacher For the Appeal-Democrat The stretch of the Sacramento River from Woodson Bridge near Corning to Hamilton City is legendary for the excellent salmon fishing it has offered over the years. With the improvement in salmon numbers this year after the unprecedented fishery collapse of 2008-'09, fishermen are excited to again be out for the hard-fighting chinooks during the first full season since 2007. "It's great to be back on the river," said Paul Kneeland, publisher of the Fish Sniffer magazine, after landing a 32-pound chinook, a beautiful buck netted by Robert Weese of Northern California Guide Service. Kneeland and I were fishing with Brenden and Perry Montoya of Loomis. This was the first time that I had fished for salmon around the Woodson Bridge area since 2005. The fishing this season started on July 16 with spotty results, but has improved dramatically in recent weeks, with experienced guides and anglers catching daily limits. While jacks in the 4- to 10-pound range made up most of the catch earlier this season, larger fish are now showing. Federal biologists this year forecasted an ocean abundance estimate of around 730,000 Sacramento River fall chinooks, far above the number needed for optimum spawning this fall. The conservation goal for salmon returning to spawn in the river is 122,000?180,000 fish. While salmon counts over the Red Bluff Diversion Dam were relatively low during the beginning of the season, the counts ramped up after the fall run entered the river. The cumulative total of fish over the dam this year was 7,134, compared with the 5-year average of 3,757. The total count for the final week that the dam gates were up was 2,270 fish, with 995 counted on Aug. 30. Paul, Brenden, Perry and I met Robert at 5:45 a.m. at the Woodson Bridge County Park boat ramp. As soon as it began to get light, we sped down the river in Robert's Alumaweld jet boat. We started at the first spot ? Four Mile Hole. "You want to each put on 4 ounce weights here," Robert advised. "Let out line slowly until you reach the bottom and reel up four cranks on the reel. You'll know it when you hook up." Then within 10 minutes, Weese had the first hook-up of the day. Unfortunately, he lost that fish. "Crank the gear up," Weese told us after we didn't have any more hits. Finally, we got down to Anderson Hole. "You want to use 6 ounces here to get your Kwikfish down to the bottom," he advised. Brenden hooked up a fish and began cranking it in. "Everybody get your lines out the water," Robert shouted. I began reeling in my line and felt a surge on my line and set the hook. "Hey, I'm hooked up also," I yelled. I tried to fight the fish on the starboard side of the bow, but the fish wouldn't cooperate. My line got crossed with Brenden's line. Robert netted the first fish, a bright 10-pounder. At first, Robert thought that was my fish, but it actually turned out to be Brenden's. In spite of all the tangled lines, I still had a fish on that I slowly worked toward the boat. "Lift your rod," Robert said. I reeled the line up to the swivel, lifted the salmon up and Robert netted it. It was a 22-pound ocean bright hen. "That's probably the biggest fish caught in this stretch of river today," Robert said. After all of that pandemonium, we didn't hook any more fish for another hour. Robert decided to try a hole where nobody was fishing, the Kelly Hole. At the top of the hole, he saw big numbers of fish on his graph. Within an hour, Brenden had caught an 8-pound salmon to fill his limit, and his dad bagged his first salmon of the day. Then Kneeland landed the biggest fish of the day, a beautiful 32-pound buck. Meanwhile, Perry landed his second fish, a jack, while Paul landed yet another big slug, a 24-pound beauty. We only had one more fish to go until we were limited out. It didn't take long. Before 2 p.m., I successfully battled my second fish of the day, another 22-pounder to match my earlier fish. We ended up with limits of chinooks, including four weighing 32, 24, 22 and 22 pounds. It was a great, memorable day of fishing on the Sacramento. The salmon season will run through December 18 this year. For more information about salmon fishing with Robert Weese of Northern California Guide Service, call 530-755-7196. See archived 'Outdoors' stories ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Sun Sep 25 18:06:11 2011 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:06:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:=20[env-trinity]=20KlamBlog-Before=20the=20storm=20?= =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=93=20Behind=20the=20scenes=20(2)?= Message-ID: <2fce.25f1162.3bb12a03@aol.com> In a message dated 9/25/2011 11:01:26 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, t.schlosser at msaj.com writes: There are holes in each of these claims. 1. Re. the 100,000 af, the DEIS, page 2-50, says "The diversion limitations would result in the availability of irrigation water to be approximately 100,000 acre-feet less than the current demand in the driest years to protect mainstem flows." But this confuses demand with lawful diversions at present. In dry years, the coho BiOp restricts diversion to well below demand. So a fairer estimate of increased water for fish would be the difference between the Appendix E-1 amount and the amount permitted by the BiOp. Sadly, that number is negative, i.e., the BIop reduces deliveries below the diversion limitation; so the diversion limitation adds nothing for fish in such years. Zero gain, not 100taf. Glen's Response: The Baseline for comparison for Project water uses to KBRA-imposed water limitations is 1960-2000, years considered "typical" of potential uses, with the Project at its current size. If there were no constraints imposed by the KBRA or other laws, this is what the Project would still use today, on average. Its quite a bit higher than the KBRA Diversion Limitation in dry years. The KBRA does reduce (in some dry years as much as 100,000 acre feet) total allowed future Project diversons as compared to that baseline of typical demand, capping it to the Diversion Limitation of 330,000 to 380,000 acre feet (precise limiting amount depending on each water year). This is up to a 100,000 af reduction. My numbers are accurate -- sorry, this is not something you can work your way around, it is purely mathematical. You (and many others) confusingly compare the current ESA-driven BiOp "minimum flows" requirements against the KBRA... but the KBRA flows are intended to work in concert WITH BiOp flows, not pitted against them. The KBRA does not, and never could, suspend the ESA, nor amend it in any way. Thus whichever provides the BEST flows for salmon in any given water year will set the floor. Implying that they conflict is simply false reasoning. And if you look at the last 10 years of so of BiOp history as the ESA has actually been applied to govern lower river minimum flows, in some years the KBRA provided more water for fish, and in other water years the ESA/BiOps did so. It all depends upon the water year, and on what the BiOp calls for. It also varies by time of year which provides more. But one telling argument for firmly institutionalizing salmon-friendly flows through the KBRA, independent of the ESA or any other similar legal hook, is this: What will those who depend completely upon the ESA to shape salmon flows do when and if the ESA listing of coho salmon disappears? What will they then rely upon? The answer, in absence of the KBRA, is "nothing." If that ESA listing goes away, those who depend on the ESA are suddenly out of options to push for water reforms. And few people know how incredibly close we have come, twice at least, to losing that Klamath coho ESA listing in the federal Courts and in Congress. There is a Delisting Petition for coho salmon pending right now, in fact, and others almost certainly coming. And twice in the 9th Circuit it was a very close vote. PCFFA has been a lead plaintiff in defending that current coho ESA listing in several cases. Coho in the Klamath could be ESA delisted in at least one of three ways: (1) They go extinct -- all too likely, especially in the Scott and Shasta; (2) ironically, they recover enough so ESA protections are no longer in place or deemed necessary, or; (3) coho are judicially delisted through any of a number of means, including Alsea Valley-type cases (hatchery vs. wild counting), a delisting petition, or reclassification of the ESU so that Klamath salmon become a separate Distinct Population Segment (DPS), and then go extinct. And all this is aside from the fact that, if the GOP takes full control of the federal Administration in the next election, including the Senate and Presidency, we can likely kiss the ESA itself goodbye. Efforts to repeal the ESA itself only lost in Congress in the past few years by a handful of votes, or by lucky delays until the Congressional clock ran out. The future of the ESA itself hangs in Congress by only a couple of hairs. My point, which I will now return to, originally was this: Dam removal without the KBRA means none of the many benefits the KBRA promises to provide, which are outlined and analyzed in the Draft EIS. Dam removal alone simply CANNOT get us to effective salmon recovery, nor guaranteed water for the National Refuges, nor fully fund TMDL Clean Water Act improvements, nor major realignment of water from the upper basin in ways that are more salmon-friendly, etc., on its own. On all those issues you just cannot get there from here without the KBRA! 2. The 30 taf will be purchases of water rights funded by federal appropriations, if any. We don't need the KBRA for that voluntary program, just the appropriations. Also, if those additional flows into UKL are achieved, that also increases somewhat the diversion limitation, reducing the net gain to the river. Glen's Response: As to your first point, good luck getting that separate Congressional appropriation without: (a) any overarching plan such as the KBRA to hook it to; (b) any of the incentive programs provided for landowner participation through the KBRA to get them to voluntarily give up that water. As to your second point, you are mistaken. Achieving the 30,000 af off-Project reduction required under the KBRA does not change the on-Project Diversion Limitation, nor reduce net gains to the river in any way. 3. The Williamson Delta, Agency Lake and Barnes Ranch storage areas--aren't some of these already built? Again, it's new federal appropriations (or Nature Conservancy funding) that will expand UKL storage, not the KBRA. Glen's Response: Yes, progress is being made on all those projects, and some have been partially achieved, as in the Williamson Delta Project. That is not an argument against any of the remainder. And, as you note, these will simply capture run-off that would otherwise go to the river. Reregulating flow may help bridge drought years but there's surely a value in letting the river run high and reshape and clean itself during wet years, something that would be reduced by building greater storage and capturing high flows. Glen's Response: The same could be said for any upper basin water storage, since water management is a zero-sum game. That does not mean we should give up on increasing and restoring the wetlands storage base of the upper basin that has been lost. But biologically, the extra water does salmon far more good during the spring for out-migration, or for summer and fall, when flows are lowest (and the risk of another 2002-type adult fish kill is highest) than that relatively small amount of water does in the winter when the river is flooding at 5,000 cfs or greater, sometimes much greater. The KBRA flow regime embodies that biological principle -- the flow curves the salmon evolved for are what they thrive in best. Scouring flood flows in the winter will still happen, never fear -- in fact, they cannot be avoided. Flood control was not build into any of the dams to any significant degree. Personally I think "bridging drought years" is all to the good if we can avoid more major 2002-type fish kills as a result, or at the minimum make them FAR less likely. And that is precisely what the KBRA would help to do. It is not the entire answer, nor can it address every issue, but in my view will get us a long way toward some major Klamath River restoration goals. ============================================= Glen H. Spain, NW Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 O:(541)689-2000 -- Fax:(541)689-2500 Email: fish1ifr at aol.com Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Mon Sep 26 09:36:21 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:36:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Cows versus trout in the Eastern Sierra In-Reply-To: <2ip70svclo3empokfksltgji.1316910919728@email.android.com> References: <2ip70svclo3empokfksltgji.1316910919728@email.android.com> Message-ID: <4E80AA05.4040607@tcrcd.net> Cows versus trout in the Eastern Sierra THE LOS ANGELES TIMES | SEPTEMBER 25, 2011 http://feeds.latimes.com/~r/latimes/news/~3/mJnVn6iNlQ0/la-me-trout-grazing-20110925,0,437917.story The right of ranchers to continue running cattle is dependent on the outcome of a dispute over how best to protect the ... read more From tstokely at att.net Mon Sep 26 15:54:57 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:54:57 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping summaries-through September 23 References: <4E806A85.1B1D.0039.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: From: Wade Sinnen Date: September 26, 2011 12:06:24 PM PDT To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Trinity River trapping summaries-through September 23 Folks, Attached is the latest an greatest for two main stem weirs and Trinity River Hatchery. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Biologist Supervisor Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 82944 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Wed Sep 28 11:09:42 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:09:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update September 28, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all, Our latest within-season update for the 2011 Trinity River redd survey is available from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Website at the link below. This week's report includes a Google Earth file of currently mapped redds. Click on "Trinity River 2011 Redd Survey Update" near the bottom of the page. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/projectUpdates.html We've mapped 169 redds so far. I hope to see you out there enjoying the river! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 3 15:55:42 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 15:55:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: trapping summaries for Trinity River weirs and hatchery References: <4E89D41E.1B1D.0039.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: <94040038-F925-4F23-987B-8AD683990957@att.net> From: Wade Sinnen Date: October 3, 2011 3:27:23 PM PDT To: Curtis Milliron Subject: trapping summaries for Trinity River weirs and hatchery Folks, The attached spreadsheet has the most recent trapping totals for Junction City and Willow Creek weirs. The Junction City weir was pulled last Friday so this will constitute the last update for that site. The volume of data at Trinity River Hatchery will cause some delays in reporting. As that data becomes available I will be including in the weekly updates. Please respond to this email if you have any questions regarding the summaries. Cheers, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Biologist Supervisor Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 83456 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Oct 4 20:08:44 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 20:08:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update October 4, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all, Our latest within-season update for the 2011 Trinity River redd survey is available from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Website http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/projectUpdates.html We mapped 317 redds and 107 carcasses last week. I hope to see you out there enjoying the river! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wnshaw2000 at yahoo.com Wed Oct 5 20:33:42 2011 From: wnshaw2000 at yahoo.com (Bill and Linda Shaw) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 20:33:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity fish count Message-ID: <1317872022.60921.YahooMailClassic@web65416.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> All I want is the fish counts on the Trinity River so I know when to fish for half pounders in Hoopa/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Thu Oct 6 12:40:18 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 12:40:18 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: CEQA Scoping for an Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Policy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4E8E0422.3070708@tcrcd.net> This is a message from the North Coast Region Water Quality Control Board. _________________________________________________ Attached are a Public Notice and CEQA Scoping Document for the inclusion of an Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Policy (Restoration Policy) into the Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region. There are two Public Workshops and CEQA Scoping Meetings (collectively, workshops) scheduled to elicit public comment on the scope and environmental impacts potentially arising from implementation of the proposed Restoration Policy. The first workshop will take place on November 3, 2011 in Santa Rosa, CA. The second will be held on November 8, 2011 in Weaverville, CA. Written comments on the CEQA Scoping Document should be submitted no later than November 8, 2011. Interested Parties are also encouraged to visit our website for information on Basin Planning and other activities. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoast/ _________________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to reg1_basin_planning as: mdowdle at tcrcd.net. To unsubscribe click here: http://swrcb18.waterboards.ca.gov/u?id=450910.b3c4f673909328f10a11fcf0a43e3c2d&n=T&l=reg1_basin_planning&o=245209 or send a blank email to leave-245209-450910.b3c4f673909328f10a11fcf0a43e3c2d at swrcb18.waterboards.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 111003_ceqa_RestorationPolicy.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 85947 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 111003_PublicWorkshop_RestorationPolicy.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 22890 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 10 13:16:16 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:16:16 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping summaries References: <4E92EBED.1B1D.0039.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: <06C7E24E-4BB2-4B73-BED9-CC6F8D990C9F@att.net> From: Wade Sinnen Date: October 10, 2011 12:59:39 PM PDT To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Trinity River trapping summaries Folks, The attached spreadsheet contains trapping data through Oct. 7th, 2011. The Junction City weir was removed for the season last week. We are seeing large numbers of steelhead pass through Willow Creek and have surpassed the number trapped there all of last year. Since many are AD-clipped hatchery fish we expect ample opportunity for harvest on steelhead this year. The Department encourages harvest of these hatchery steelhead since it appears we will have no problem meeting egg take goals for this species at the hatchery this year. Another encouraging sign in the data this year is that a large percentage of Chinook salmon are two year old jacks (grilse). This potentially bodes well for next year's run, particularly the three year old adult component. If you have any questions, please feel free to respond to this email. Regards, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Biologist Supervisor Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 83968 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Oct 11 18:48:35 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:48:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update October 11, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all, Check our webpage for the latest within-season update for the 2011 Trinity River redd survey http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/projectUpdates.html Things got wet and ramped up quickly last week. We mapped 498 redds. Get out there if you can! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Nicole_Athearn at fws.gov Wed Oct 12 15:03:53 2011 From: Nicole_Athearn at fws.gov (Nicole_Athearn at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:03:53 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Nicole Athearn is out of the office. Message-ID: I will be out of the office starting 10/10/2011 and will not return until 10/13/2011. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Oct 13 12:31:31 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:31:31 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Recent news clips of interest, mostly Klamath Dams Message-ID: Below are some recent news clips of interest. I have also included a very interesting letter to the Editor from yesterday's Trinity Journal from a Mr. Frank Galusha. I'm sure that there will be plenty of responses to it! Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org CalTrout's Curtis Knight's op-ed for the Klamath Settlement Agreements - http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/opinions/letters_to_the_editor/x1461799589/Guest-opinion-Klamath-agreement-implications-are-big-for-Siskiyou-County Siskiyou Supes ask McClintock for legislation stopping Klamath dam removal - http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1742683788/Board-votes-to-send-dam-letter allegation that Klamath dam removal threatens Yreka's water supply - http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1581993850/Report-Dam-removal-could-jeopardize-Yreka-s-water-supply Siskiyou County to stay in 5 county salmon conservation program - http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1611322363/-Five-Counties-Supervisors-decide-to-stay-part-of-salmonid-conservation-program Humboldt Supes get a Klamath dam removal update - http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_19044359 dueling studies on the Scott River - http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1461794032/Karuk-Tribe-North-Coast-Regional-Water-Quality-Control-Board-conduct-parallel-studies Before leaving Judge Wanger rejects the lawsuit seeking to shut down commercial salmon fishing - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2011/09/commercial-salmon-fishing-pacific-coast.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GreenspaceEnvironmentBlog+%28Greenspace%29&utm_content=Google+Reader WaterWatch of Oregon's view of the Klamath Restoration Agreement - http://www.sacbee.com/2011/10/02/3951717/klamath-pact-doesnt-protect-the.html comments on Klamath dam removal EIR/EIS - http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1214498537/Dam-reports-Public-weighs-in Fox "News" on Klamath Dam removal - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/24/study-shows-klamath-dam-removal-will-help-farmers-fish-but-skepticism-remains/ Sac Bee editorializes for Klamath dam removal - http://www.sacbee.com/2011/09/26/3938083/klamath-deal-needs-a-boost-from.html http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-10-12/Opinion/Dam_removal_junkies_are_ecoterrorists.html Dam removal junkies are eco-terrorists From Frank Galusha | Shingletown Despite current reports to the contrary, removing the Klamath dams is not going to help the salmon, particularly our fall run chinook. What you have been hearing and reading is nothing more than a pack of lies from eco-terrorists. There is no scientific evidence dam removal will help salmon or even steelhead. Anyone who claims otherwise, including our Secretary of the Interior, Kenneth Salazar, our various resource agencies, some tribal reps and environmental extremists, are telling a big lie. They have been repeating it over and over for decades in the fashion of Joseph Goebbels, Hitler?s propagandist. This propaganda has turned the truth on its head. Most other media and reporters have bought into this hoax and give it credence but it is still a lie. The Klamath gets more water now. Prior to the building of the dams there was less water in the Klamath River than there is today. This fact was reported by early explorers, verified by early settlers and is understandable. In late summer and early fall in most years the Upper Klamath was a putrid, algae-ridden green-pea soup. This was so because this volcanic region was (and still is) heavily laden with phosphorous, which is what green algae needs to exist. Most fall run chinook, which have always been our cash-cow-salmon crop, had spawned and died before they reached Oregon, which contributed to the upper river?s unhealthy late summer condition. Look at those salmon that arrive at Iron Gate Dam today. Are they not are dark, dead meat unfit for human consumption? Lots of water never reached the sea. Prior to reclamation, which began in the early 1900s, much of the water from the Upper Klamath Basin flowed into Tule Lake and Lower Klamath Lake. These were sinks. The water either evaporated or percolated into the soil. It never reached the sea. That?s why the area is called a basin. Those lakes were so huge and so deep they accommodated commercial traffic, especially ferry boats which ran from points in California to Klamath Falls and Malin, Ore. This is why the Klamath ran dry many years in the fall. It didn?t get the water that went to these lakes. Coupled with natural barriers below Keno, this is also why the fall chinook did not make it much further than they do today because even then the Klamath was upside down. This is a key point! Most rivers are cold at the top and hot at the bottom. The Klamath is hot at the top and colder at its mouth. This is because it was (and still is) cooled by its cold Trinity Alps tributaries in California and the snow-melt fed Trinity River. Of course, there were more salmon before the dams were built. There was also no commercial fishing, no gill netting or recreational fishing, and the river?s main-stem habitat was relatively unspoiled, which was more than enough to maintain the high population levels. It?s also interesting to note the Klamath Tribe of Oregon did not eat or revere salmon. They ate suckerfish because suckerfish were plentiful in the warm water of the Upper Klamath Basin. Conversely, at the river?s colder mouth and near the confluence with the Trinity, and along the Trinity, the tribes ate ocean-fresh salmon, smoked them and probably traded them to tribes further up the river. Dam removal won?t increase habitat for chinook! The resource agencies are lying when they tell you taking out the dams will open up hundreds of miles of new and former habitat for salmon. They have no clear proof the salmon, particularly fall-run Chinook, ever made it up into those Oregon rivers. What?s more, if the dams are removed it?s likely few if any salmon would be able to traverse the now even-warmer, almost swamp-like upper portions of Upper Klamath Lake. And there are (and were) natural barriers as well as noted above ? barriers so high the salmon of prior years could not have leapt over them. The junkies are trying to do impossible. This is the largest dam removal project that?s ever been considered. It is simply a gamble, an experiment that could fail and cost billions in lost agriculture, property rights and the fishery it?s supposed to save. Farming is not the cause of salmon declines. The dam removal junkies are also lying to you when they blame the farmers for taking all the Upper Klamath Basin water for irrigation and polluting what?s left with pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers and then putting it back into the river. That is not happening. It is the natural phosphorous in the region that causes the lakes behind the dams to become algae laden. The truth is the water coming out of Iron Gate Dam is cleaner than the water that enters the reservoir. While the green algae water is ugly and uninviting to swimmers, lakes such as Copco and Iron Gate are actually healthy. Many species of fish thrive in these lakes, including yellow perch, crappie and bass, and they are great eating. Fish can?t survive, let alone flourish, in unhealthy water. These environmental nuts want to ?re-wild? this entire region. Going back to the wild means destroying civilization, which is exactly what terrorists do. Dams are monuments to what man has done to conquer nature. Destroying them is eco-terrorism! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Fri Oct 14 10:51:16 2011 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:51:16 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Large Wood: Critical to the Trinity River: Info meeting Oct 20 6-8:30 pm at Trinity Alps Golf Course Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A78389CA2@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Dear Trinity River Enthusiasts - You are invited to our large wood informational meeting on October 20 at the Trinity Alps Golf Course at 6 - 8:30 pm. Light refreshments will be served as part of this educational event. Below is a list of the invited speakers and topics: * Tim Abbe, PhD, LEG, Geomorphologist; Cardno-ENTRIX, Seattle, WA * Steve Clayton PhD, P.E., Biological Engineer; CH2M HILL, Boise, ID * Mike McHenry, Fisheries Biologist; Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, Port Angeles, WA * Hans Hunger, P.E., CFM; Pierce County Program Manager, Tacoma, WA * Eric Wiseman, Fisheries Biologist; US Forest Service, Weaverville, CA I. History/Purpose/Reason for Wood - Tim Abbe II. Benefits of Wood - Mike McHenry III. River Management - Steve Clayton IV. Safety and Liability - Tim Abbe V. Management Challenges - Hans Hunger VI. Local Perspective - Eric Wiseman Hope to see you there! Brandt [cid:image003.png at 01CC8A5F.32A6F330] Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 901481 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Wood Informational Meeting - Oct 20 Invitation.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 142377 bytes Desc: Wood Informational Meeting - Oct 20 Invitation.jpg URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 17 09:34:38 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:34:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping summaries References: <4E9BF1E8.1B1D.0039.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: <2D1775ED-90E4-4EA0-B357-E0C489EE5995@att.net> From: Wade Sinnen Date: October 17, 2011 9:15:17 AM PDT To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Trinity River trapping summaries Folks, Attached spreadsheet contains trapping data for two main stem weirs and Trinity River Hatchery. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Biologist Supervisor Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 83968 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Wed Oct 19 16:17:55 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:17:55 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update October 19, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all, An in-season update of our spawning survey is available on our webpage. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/projectUpdates.html I had a chance to get out there myself a few days this week and last. It's great to see fish spawning in so many places! Check it out yourself if you can. We identified 650 new redds just last week. Note: 70 redds in reach 1 (Lewiston Dam to Old Lewiston Bridge) are not shown in the Google Earth file due to technical difficulties. They will be mapped along with the new redds in the next update. Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Oct 24 08:09:40 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:09:40 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update week of October 17 to 21, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all, An in-season update of our spawning survey is available on our webpage. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/projectUpdates.html We identified 689 new redds the week of October 17 to 21. I got to participate in the survey myself this week. There were happy fishermen wherever we went! Get out there and enjoy the fishing or view the spawning activity if you can. Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 24 16:25:45 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:25:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] NEWS - Interior Department's Bay-Delta Negotiations Draw Rebuke From California Members of Congress References: <79F6976D-29BC-452E-8AB6-EF35D3000228@davidnesmith.com> Message-ID: All, The Trinity River is a Delta Tributary Watershed and is affected by the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). There is also an informative report on last week's CA legislative hearing on the BDCP at the following (ridiculously long) website address: http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=xp76ilcab&v=001zHmPEHN4waMomAXuDT2qseci7I3vZURgI1dpvC3GJ3qX7rYbpoY6n2WwSSeNAN6SSA2JnZDg9hOZsWmm9lXACQrpyxzilG8rlhH2rytIlcw%3D Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org > Subject: FW: NEWS - Interior Department's Bay-Delta Negotiations Draw Rebuke From California Members of Congress > > > > > > UNITED STATES CONGRESS > > For Immediate Release > October 24, 2011 > Amy Peake (Miller) 202-225-2095 > Austin Vevurka (Thompson) 202-225-3311 > Mara Lee (Matsui) 202-225-7163 > Lauren Smith (McNerney) 202-225-1947 > Donald Lathbury (Garamendi) 202-570-3178 > > Interior Department?s Bay-Delta Negotiations Draw Rebuke From California Members of Congress > > Washington, DC ? Five Northern California Members of Congress are demanding answers on the current state of the Bay-Delta planning process and calling on the Interior Department today to rescind a ?flawed? Memorandum of Agreement that was developed behind closed doors and that gives water export agencies south of the Delta and in Southern California unprecedented influence over an important public process concerning California?s precious fresh water supplies. > > U.S. Reps. George Miller (CA-7), Mike Thompson (CA-1), Doris Matsui (CA-5), Jerry McNerney (CA-11) and John Garamendi (CA-10) wrote today to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar asking that the recent agreement between the Department and water agencies be rescinded and that the process be opened up to include other key stakeholders left out of the discussions, including Bay Area, Delta and coastal communities, farmers, businesses, and fishermen. > > Excerpt: ?Interior should immediately rescind this flawed MOA and work instead to establish a successful BDCP process that is transparent and based on parity, and that genuinely puts the restoration of the Bay-Delta and its fisheries, the needs of local communities, and the quality of local water resources on par with other water supply goals.? > > The lawmakers recently held a series of meetings with Interior Department and California officials to express their concerns about the Memorandum of Agreement that the Department signed with water export agencies, an agreement that was developed and signed without input from Bay-Delta stakeholders. The Department had previously told the lawmakers to expect an answer to their inquiries early last week, but failed to meet that deadline. Today?s letter from the lawmakers requests a written response from Secretary Salazar by the beginning of next week. > > Excerpt: ?the BDCP planning process has failed to treat these affected groups in a fair and transparent manner, and we do not believe that the emerging plan is reflecting Bay-Delta constituencies? concerns and interests. > > The members wrote that the process as it currently stands has established an unrealistic timeline for the completion of the plan, and that it raises expectations of favorable outcomes for the water agencies that signed it. These concerns ? along with others that the lawmakers raised in their meetings ? share several traits: > > Excerpt: ?They have the potential to harm the Bay-Delta, fishing communities, local farmers, and our constituents more broadly. They compromise Interior?s ability to exercise its mandates to restore the Bay-Delta ecosystem and California?s fisheries, and to consider the interests of all stakeholder groups. And they were developed in closed-door negotiations with the water export contractors that excluded all other interests.? > > The full text of the letter is below. A pdf version can be found here. > > _____ > > > > October 24, 2011 > > The Hon. Kenneth Salazar > Secretary, Department of the Interior > 1849 C Street, N.W. > Washington DC 20240 > > Dear Secretary Salazar: > We are writing to follow up our recent meetings with Interior officials and other participants in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and to express our strong objections to the current direction of that plan. > > The constituents we represent have a great deal at stake in the future of the BDCP process and ultimate plan. Delta, Bay Area and coastal communities, residents of the floodplain, farmers, businesses, fishermen, and the rest of our constituents could be profoundly affected by the BDCP. But to date, the BDCP planning process has failed to treat these affected groups in a fair and transparent manner, and we do not believe that the emerging plan is reflecting Bay-Delta constituencies? concerns and interests. > > Specifically, it does not appear that the federal government is taking seriously the goal of restoring endangered salmon or that it intends to operate the Central Valley Project to meet the statutory mandate to protect, restore, and enhance fish, wildlife, and associated habitats. Furthermore, we cannot accept proposals ? including ones under consideration by the BDCP ? that would harm Delta communities and the regional economy by eroding water quality for drinking and agriculture. > > This is a critical moment, and we urge you to take concrete corrective actions now so that the BDCP process can succeed. Your Department recently signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with certain state and federal water export agencies that excluded other stakeholders. That agreement offers the signatories unprecedented influence over the process, and it raises expectations of favorable outcomes. While we appreciate your outreach to the Delta counties and to the environmental NGOs since the signing of the agreement, the existence of this unfair agreement continues to taint the process and must be withdrawn. At a minimum, we believe that Interior should retract its approval of the MOA and allow for a public comment period of 45 days. > > The MOA creates a number of serious problems. For example, this agreement binds BDCP participants to an unrealistic timeline that has the serious potential to rush the many important decisions that have thus far been put off, avoid a full consideration of alternatives, and undermine the much-needed scientific analyses that remain to be done ? analyses that many of the agreement?s signatories have resisted. > > In addition, the MOA describes long-term guarantees of certainty to federal water contractors as ?an essential element of a successful BDCP.? This is an unreasonable standard to establish, especially as no equivalent assertions have been offered to any other BDCP participants. We are additionally concerned that establishing certainty for the contractors as an ?essential element? of the BDCP is in conflict with the many other federal responsibilities in play in the BDCP, such as doubling the populations of salmon and other anadromous fish as required by law, providing necessary water for wildlife refuges, preserving water quality and availability for Delta agriculture, and meeting the needs of other water users. > > The agreement further establishes an unequal process going forward: the MOA invites the water export contractors to collaborate with the federal agencies on the responses to public comments, allows the water export contractors early and exclusive access to draft consultant work product, and gives the water export contractors direct control over the consultants who are writing the documents. California?s Legislative Analyst?s Office recently testified before the State Assembly about additional provisions of this document that ?may be seen as favorable to the contractors,? including the fact that a public NEPA document may not be issued without explicit authorization from the water export contractors. This raises very serious questions about whose process this is, ultimately; if the water export contractors? funding has given them control over the process, it would be to the detriment of the Bay-Delta and to the public interest. > > The above concerns ? along with the many others we have raised in our recent meetings ? share several worrying traits. These are positions sought by the same handful of state and federal water contractors that have long dominated the BDCP process. They have the potential to harm the Bay-Delta, fishing communities, local farmers, and our constituents more broadly. They compromise Interior?s ability to exercise its mandates to restore the Bay-Delta ecosystem and California?s fisheries, and to consider the interests of all stakeholder groups. And they were developed in closed-door negotiations with the water export contractors that excluded all other interests. > > Because we have not yet received a response to our request, we reiterate it here: Interior should immediately rescind this flawed MOA and work instead to establish a successful BDCP process that is transparent and based on parity, and that genuinely puts the restoration of the Bay-Delta and its fisheries, the needs of local communities, and the quality of local water resources on par with other water supply goals. That includes: > > ? Ensuring that all stakeholder involvement is fair, equal and transparent: all stakeholder groups should have equal access to BDCP draft documents and consultant products and equal ability to provide direction to BDCP consultants, and meetings involving the export contractors, state and federal agencies and the BDCP consultants should be open to all stakeholders. > > ? Establishing a realistic timeline that allows sufficient time to address the serious unanswered questions remaining before the BDCP, conduct the appropriate scientific reviews including of all alternatives, and comply with NEPA and other relevant statutes. > > ? Genuinely committing to the co-equal goals: any ?certainty? under consideration for the water export contractors must be matched by equal, specific, and certain commitments to restoring the Bay-Delta to health as required by state and federal law. > > ? Maintaining state and federal agencies? ability to implement other statutory mandates including, but not limited to, the CVPIA?s anadromous fish restoration program (including B2 water, the Restoration Fund, and other activities), the refuge water supply program, Trinity River restoration, and the requirement that beneficiaries must pay for the mitigation of any project. > > ? Ensuring that any final BDCP preserves water quality and water availability for farmers, families, and businesses in the Bay-Delta area, and preserves flood protection for communities in the region. > > We are disappointed that we find ourselves in the present situation, and that the interests of our constituents are still facing these hurdles at this stage of the BDCP process. The public interest and the stewardship of the Department require that transparency and equal participation must be reestablished for all stakeholders in the BDCP as soon as possible. To that end, we reiterate our request for corrective action as to this MOA, and as you consider the Department?s next steps regarding the BDCP, we seek your commitment that you provide us with advance notice when making determinations that would affect our constituents. > > For all of the reasons detailed above, we request a written response to this request by October 31. > > Sincerely, > > > > # # # > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 10657 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Oct 25 10:31:41 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:31:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher/indybay- California Representatives Slam 'Closed Door' Bay-Delta Process Message-ID: <064AABDC-63E8-4C9A-9EE2-13F5D268A297@att.net> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/10/24/18694808.php California | Central Valley | Environment & Forest Defense | Government & Elections California Representatives Slam 'Closed Door' Bay-Delta Process by Dan Bacher Monday Oct 24th, 2011 5:13 PM The Representatives echoed the concerns of Delta residents, family farmers, fishing groups, Indian Tribes and environmentalists, who strongly oppose the state-federal plan to build the peripheral canal to export more water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River to corporate agribusiness and southern California. They oppose the canal because of the threat it poses to imperiled Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations, Delta farms and Delta communities. Photo of Sacramento River chinook salmon courtesy of National Marine Fisheries Service. chinook_salmon.jpg California Representatives Slam 'Closed Door' Bay-Delta Process by Dan Bacher Five Northern California Representatives today demanded answers on the current state of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) process - and called on the Interior Department to rescind a ?flawed? Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that they say "was developed behind closed doors." The Members of Congress accused the memorandum of giving water export agencies south of the Delta and in Southern California "unprecedented influence" over an important public process concerning California?s fresh water supplies. The Representatives echoed the concerns of Delta residents, family farmers, fishing groups, Indian Tribes and environmentalists, who oppose the state-federal plan to build the peripheral canal to export more water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to corporate agribusiness and southern California. They oppose the canal because of the threat it poses to imperiled Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations, Delta farms and Delta communities. In a letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, U.S. Reps. George Miller (CA-7), Mike Thompson (CA-1), Doris Matsui (CA-5), Jerry McNerney (CA-11) and John Garamendi (CA-10) asked that the recent agreement between the Department and water agencies be rescinded and that the process be opened up to include other key stakeholders left out of the discussions, including Bay Area, Delta and coastal communities, farmers, businesses, and fishermen. ?Interior should immediately rescind this flawed MOA and work instead to establish a successful BDCP process that is transparent and based on parity, and that genuinely puts the restoration of the Bay-Delta and its fisheries, the needs of local communities, and the quality of local water resources on par with other water supply goals," they wrote. The lawmakers recently held a series of meetings with Department and California officials to express their concerns about the MOA that the federal and state governments signed two months ago with water export agencies, an agreement that the Representatives said was developed and signed without any input from Bay-Delta stakeholders. The agreement would clear the way for the agencies to commit an additional $100 million for consulting and planning work on a controversial peripheral canal expected to cost $12 billion. The Department had previously told the lawmakers to expect an answer to their inquiries early last week, but failed to meet that deadline, according to a joint news release from the Members of Congress. The letter from the lawmakers requests a written response from Secretary Salazar by the beginning of next week. "The BDCP planning process has failed to treat these affected groups in a fair and transparent manner, and we do not believe that the emerging plan is reflecting Bay-Delta constituencies? concerns and interests," they stated. The members also wrote that the process as it currently stands has established an "unrealistic timeline" for the completion of the plan, and that it raises expectations of favorable outcomes for the water agencies that signed it. These concerns share several traits: "They have the potential to harm the Bay-Delta, fishing communities, local farmers, and our constituents more broadly," they said. "They compromise Interior?s ability to exercise its mandates to restore the Bay-Delta ecosystem and California?s fisheries, and to consider the interests of all stakeholder groups. And they were developed in closed-door negotiations with the water export contractors that excluded all other interests.? The representatives also noted, "It does not appear that the federal government is taking seriously the goal of restoring endangered salmon or that it intends to operate the Central Valley Project to meet the statutory mandate to protect, restore, and enhance fish, wildlife, and associated habitats." Adam Fetcher, Press Secretary for the U.S. Department of the Interior, said Interior has received the letter and will respond directly to the Representatives. "Secretary Salazar has been clear that California?s complex water problems require science-based solutions developed as part of a close partnership between the federal and state government, as well as all key stakeholders," said Fetcher. "Transparency and accessibility for all parties in this process is a key part of our efforts to move forward with the BDCP as quickly as possible in order to address the all-important goals of a healthy Bay Delta ecosystem and a reliable water supply for California.? Delta advocates fear that the construction of the canal and export of more water from the Delta will result in the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail, green sturgeon and other imperiled fish species. In spite of widespread opposition to the canal, the Brown and Obama administrations are fast-tracking the BDCP process. Restore the Delta, a coalition of Delta residents, business leaders, civic organizations, community groups, faith-based communities, union locals, farmers, fishermen, and environmentalists, applauded the Representatives' letter to Salazar. "We are very pleased that the Congressional Representatives from the greater Delta are calling for reform of the BDCP," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta. "The BDCP will not succeed without Delta communities, Delta landowners and fishing communities being at the table." The Bay Delta Conservation Plan will not only impact fisheries in the Central Valley and Delta, but the fish, communities and Indian Tribes of the Trinity and Klamath rivers. "The Trinity River is a Delta Tributary Watershed and is affected by the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan," noted Tom Stokely of the California Water Impact Network. The Representatives' letter was sent less than a month after two infamous records were set on the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta as the water year ended on September 30. First, 9 million Sacramento splittail were "salvaged" at the state and federal Delta pumps near Tracy in 2011. The previous record salvage number for the splittail, a native minnow found only in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River system, was 5.5 million in 2006 (http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/09/09/over-11-million-fish-salvaged-in-delta-death-pumps-since-january-1). Second, the water projects pumped a record 6.5 million acre-feet of water from the Delta in 2011, according to government data compiled by Spreck Rosecrans at Environmental Defense. The previous record was 6.3 million acre-feet in 2005. The full text of the letter is below. October 24, 2011 The Hon. Kenneth Salazar Secretary, Department of the Interior 1849 C Street, N.W. Washington DC 20240 Dear Secretary Salazar: We are writing to follow up our recent meetings with Interior officials and other participants in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and to express our strong objections to the current direction of that plan. The constituents we represent have a great deal at stake in the future of the BDCP process and ultimate plan. Delta, Bay Area and coastal communities, residents of the floodplain, farmers, businesses, fishermen, and the rest of our constituents could be profoundly affected by the BDCP. But to date, the BDCP planning process has failed to treat these affected groups in a fair and transparent manner, and we do not believe that the emerging plan is reflecting Bay-Delta constituencies? concerns and interests. Specifically, it does not appear that the federal government is taking seriously the goal of restoring endangered salmon or that it intends to operate the Central Valley Project to meet the statutory mandate to protect, restore, and enhance fish, wildlife, and associated habitats. Furthermore, we cannot accept proposals ? including ones under consideration by the BDCP ? that would harm Delta communities and the regional economy by eroding water quality for drinking and agriculture. This is a critical moment, and we urge you to take concrete corrective actions now so that the BDCP process can succeed. Your Department recently signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with certain state and federal water export agencies that excluded other stakeholders. That agreement offers the signatories unprecedented influence over the process, and it raises expectations of favorable outcomes. While we appreciate your outreach to the Delta counties and to the environmental NGOs since the signing of the agreement, the existence of this unfair agreement continues to taint the process and must be withdrawn. At a minimum, we believe that Interior should retract its approval of the MOA and allow for a public comment period of 45 days. The MOA creates a number of serious problems. For example, this agreement binds BDCP participants to an unrealistic timeline that has the serious potential to rush the many important decisions that have thus far been put off, avoid a full consideration of alternatives, and undermine the much-needed scientific analyses that remain to be done ? analyses that many of the agreement?s signatories have resisted. In addition, the MOA describes long-term guarantees of certainty to federal water contractors as ?an essential element of a successful BDCP.? This is an unreasonable standard to establish, especially as no equivalent assertions have been offered to any other BDCP participants. We are additionally concerned that establishing certainty for the contractors as an ?essential element? of the BDCP is in conflict with the many other federal responsibilities in play in the BDCP, such as doubling the populations of salmon and other anadromous fish as required by law, providing necessary water for wildlife refuges, preserving water quality and availability for Delta agriculture, and meeting the needs of other water users. The agreement further establishes an unequal process going forward: the MOA invites the water export contractors to collaborate with the federal agencies on the responses to public comments, allows the water export contractors early and exclusive access to draft consultant work product, and gives the water export contractors direct control over the consultants who are writing the documents. California?s Legislative Analyst?s Office recently testified before the State Assembly about additional provisions of this document that ?may be seen as favorable to the contractors,? including the fact that a public NEPA document may not be issued without explicit authorization from the water export contractors. This raises very serious questions about whose process this is, ultimately; if the water export contractors? funding has given them control over the process, it would be to the detriment of the Bay-Delta and to the public interest. The above concerns ? along with the many others we have raised in our recent meetings ? share several worrying traits. These are positions sought by the same handful of state and federal water contractors that have long dominated the BDCP process. They have the potential to harm the Bay-Delta, fishing communities, local farmers, and our constituents more broadly. They compromise Interior?s ability to exercise its mandates to restore the Bay-Delta ecosystem and California?s fisheries, and to consider the interests of all stakeholder groups. And they were developed in closed-door negotiations with the water export contractors that excluded all other interests. Because we have not yet received a response to our request, we reiterate it here: Interior should immediately rescind this flawed MOA and work instead to establish a successful BDCP process that is transparent and based on parity, and that genuinely puts the restoration of the Bay-Delta and its fisheries, the needs of local communities, and the quality of local water resources on par with other water supply goals. That includes: ? Ensuring that all stakeholder involvement is fair, equal and transparent: all stakeholder groups should have equal access to BDCP draft documents and consultant products and equal ability to provide direction to BDCP consultants, and meetings involving the export contractors, state and federal agencies and the BDCP consultants should be open to all stakeholders. ? Establishing a realistic timeline that allows sufficient time to address the serious unanswered questions remaining before the BDCP, conduct the appropriate scientific reviews including of all alternatives, and comply with NEPA and other relevant statutes. ? Genuinely committing to the co-equal goals: any ?certainty? under consideration for the water export contractors must be matched by equal, specific, and certain commitments to restoring the Bay-Delta to health as required by state and federal law. ? Maintaining state and federal agencies? ability to implement other statutory mandates including, but not limited to, the CVPIA?s anadromous fish restoration program (including B2 water, the Restoration Fund, and other activities), the refuge water supply program, Trinity River restoration, and the requirement that beneficiaries must pay for the mitigation of any project. ? Ensuring that any final BDCP preserves water quality and water availability for farmers, families, and businesses in the Bay-Delta area, and preserves flood protection for communities in the region. We are disappointed that we find ourselves in the present situation, and that the interests of our constituents are still facing these hurdles at this stage of the BDCP process. The public interest and the stewardship of the Department require that transparency and equal participation must be reestablished for all stakeholders in the BDCP as soon as possible. To that end, we reiterate our request for corrective action as to this MOA, and as you consider the Department?s next steps regarding the BDCP, we seek your commitment that you provide us with advance notice when making determinations that would affect our constituents. For all of the reasons detailed above, we request a written response to this request by October 31. Sincerely, # # # ? 2000?2011 San Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the SF Bay Area IMC. Disclaimer | Privacy | Contact -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: chinook_salmon.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 79444 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Oct 25 10:39:06 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:39:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News- Almost 300 attend Klamath dams hearing Message-ID: Almost 300 attend Klamath dams hearing By John Bowman http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1606478706/Almost-300-attend-Klamath-dams-hearing Siskiyou Daily News Posted Oct 24, 2011 @ 09:21 AM Yreka, Calif. ? The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) held the second of five hearings for public input on its Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Klamath dam removal at the Siskiyou Golden Fairgrounds on Thursday. Approximately 275 people came from all over Northern California and Southern Oregon to express their views on the proposed removal of the four PacifiCorp dams. Some attendees held protest signs displaying slogans both for and against dam removal, stationing themselves at the entrance to the fairgrounds to welcome the hundreds of cars funneling into the parking lot. The EIS document was released to the public on Sept. 21, and the hearings mark the halfway point for the 60-day period in which the public may submit comments on the document. The first hour of the event was left open for the public to mingle with scientists and resource managers from state and federal agencies, many of which had informational displays and materials. Dennis Lynch of the U.S. Geological Survey began the hearing with an introduction to the scientific and legal issues behind the proposal to remove the dams, followed by a brief overview of some of the possible negative andpositive impacts to the river and communities if the dams come out. ?Now is the time for the secretary of the Interior to hear what you have to say about the five alternatives,? Lynch told the crowd, referring to the five different options presented by the DOI for dealing with the currently unlicensed dams. Pam Jones, an independent professional facilitator, was on hand to guide the comment process and maintain order. She explained that each person would have exactly three minutes to express their verbal comments. In all, 80 people offered verbal comments, some directly addressing the EIS document and some addressing concerns such as excessive environmental regulation in the state and nation and fear of alleged government efforts to take control of water and property. There were a number of issues in which many speakers found common ground, such as the impact of dam removal on property values in Siskiyou County, especially around Copco Lake. Bart Kent, a retired real estate appraiser and property owner on the lake, said the DOI?s appraisal of potential property value losses was deeply flawed, citing what he considers an inappropriate starting date for the appraisal and the failure to consider the loss of value to structural improvements on properties. Dave Bitts, commercial fisherman and president of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen?s Association, said he believes removal of the dams will improve salmon fishing off the California coast and insisted that the decline of salmon in the Klamath River is not due to over-fishing. He also agreed that property value and tax revenue losses need to be addressed. ?I stand to gain from this,? Vitts said. ?And I?d hate to think that it comes at a loss to others.? Many people spoke about their distrust of the federal government, suspicions of biased science, concerns about the erosion of property rights, and federal incursions into the jurisdiction of states and counties. ?This bright idea has the potential to destroy our way of life and public safety,? Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey said. Several county supervisors spoke about their concerns about the EIS document, including Marcia Armstrong. ?The study fails to address the economic impact to the county,? Armstrong said, adding that she felt the process was ?so biased that it reeks of corruption.? Ron Reed and several other members of the Karuk tribe spoke in favor of dam removal, speaking about the cultural, spiritual and health benefits that salmon offer them. ?We took care of this basin for a very long time,? Reed told the crowd. ?We haven?t been here for two or three or four generations. We?ve been here for thousands of years. We can do all of this together if we do it right.? However, according to Betty Hall of the Shasta Nation, ?salmon were never native to the Klamath River, not for centuries.? Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar will consider public comments on the EIS as part of the Secretarial Determination process slated for completion by March 2012. Anyone who did not submit comments at the public hearing can still do so in writing until Nov. 21. For more information about other public hearings or opportunities to submit public comments, go to www.KlamathRestoration.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 26 11:38:38 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:38:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News- Sheriffs discuss challenges they believe rural communities face Message-ID: Sheriffs discuss challenges they believe rural communities face Zoom Photos John Bowman Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey introduces the panel of Northern California and Southern Oregon sheriffs at the Defend Rural America rally. By John Bowman Siskiyou Daily News Posted Oct 25, 2011 @ 09:18 AM Yreka, Calif. ? About 700 people attended a meeting at the Siskiyou Golden Fairgrounds on Saturday sponsored by the activism group Defend Rural America, founded by Idaho native Kirk MacKenzie. The meeting consisted of a film, a fundraising auction and discussions with a panel of eight sheriffs from Northern California and Southern Oregon. A charter bus brought more than 40 people from the Bay Area and around 250 people from other areas outside of Siskiyou County, according to Liz Bowen of Scott Valley Protect Our Waters (POW), who co-organized the event. More than 10 political action groups were in attendance, distributing information about candidates, ballot initiatives and issue-specific campaigns. The event got underway with the premier of a documentary film by MacKenzie about the Klamath dam removal issue and how it relates to the current status of rural communities in Siskiyou County and around the country. The film presented a wide array of concerns about the federal government?s role in land management and its impacts on rural economies and communities. Many Siskiyou County residents were featured in the film, speaking about potential effects of dam removal and wider-ranging topics such as the influence of the United Nations and environmental groups on rural communities. After the film and the auction, the panel of sheriffs, including Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey and a property rights attorney, took the stage to address their concerns about the challenges they believe rural communities are facing. Lopey began the panel discussion by presenting his views about Klamath dam removal, what he sees as federal government incursion into state and county jurisdictions, and the current state of rural America. Lopey told the audience that many sheriffs in Northern California and Southern Oregon are becoming increasingly concerned about government taking power out of the hands of citizens and making poor land use decisions that have the potential to destroy the ?rural way of life.? ?These are constitutional issues,? Lopey told the crowd. ?We are here because sheriffs are sworn to uphold the United States constitution. We are broke, so why are these people doing stupid stuff to make us poorer?? Lopey asked, referring to concerns about the costs associated with Klamath dam removal, and higher taxes and power rates that may come along with the process. Del Norte County Sheriff Dean Wilson told the audience that ?there is an assault on our communities. The government is denying us of our resources that make us self-sustaining. We have allowed this to happen to our country, but our founding fathers gave us the tools to fix it. We can take back our country county by county.? Nearly every sheriff mentioned concerns about decommissioning of roads in publicly owned forests and the lack of government coordination with local officials during the process. Trinity County Sheriff Bruce Haney said roads in national forests are essential for search and rescue missions in remote areas. Haney also expressed his concerns about the influence of government and environmentalists. ?The federal government is being inundated by environmentalists,? Haney said. ?Our youth are being indoctrinated by the public schools system and colleges.? Plumas County Sheriff Greg Hagwood said, ?Events like this are something that hasn?t happened before. There is an awakening of a giant here.? Every sheriff received a standing ovation after their opening statements, and many of the panel?s comments were punctuated with applause throughout the discussion. For more information about Defend Rural America, visit www.defendruralamerica.com. ? John Bowman can be reached at jbowman at siskiyoudaily.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: g12c000000000000000a6d38b5d73d3f52dbc2463362801fc0afa9c4a30.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13629 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: g05a05a00000000000079dcd18d502e7b2e218fde1678f381d961adcd7c.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2441 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: g05a05a0000000000002ee6dd2bd0bf72858a9ef26c70a0a40ec87eecb6.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2679 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Oct 31 08:09:35 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 08:09:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update week of October 24 to 28, 2011 Message-ID: The latest in-season update from our Trinity River mainstem spawning survey is available for download from our website http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/projectUpdates.html We mapped 665 new Trinity River salmon redds last week from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat. Until next week.... Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 31 14:26:30 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:26:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping summaries- through 10/28 References: <4EAE767E.1B1D.0039.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: <34D06600-001C-462E-BA57-A583695E487E@att.net> From: Wade Sinnen Date: October 31, 2011 10:21:54 AM PDT To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Trinity River trapping summaries- through 10/28 Folks, Attached is the most recent data for Willow Creek weir and Trinity River Hatchery. Give me a shout if you have any questions. Regards, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Biologist Supervisor Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern California - North Coast District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 84480 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 31 14:49:01 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:49:01 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Comments due Nov 16 on BDCP MOA Message-ID: <4CDD6954-A431-4C37-9E23-7DFE41BD967C@att.net> The information below is available at the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan website at: http://bdcpweb.com/Home.aspx. The Trinity River is a Delta Tributary Watershed. Although the Trinity River Record of Decision called for increased water releases from Trinity and Lewiston Dams into the Trinity River and decreased Trinity River exports to the Sacramento River/CVP, the BDCP's purpose is to meet "full contract deliveries" of Central Valley Project and State Water Project water contractors. I believe this is a big threat to the flows of the Trinity River, since the Bureau of Reclamation's 1959 Trinity River water permits still contain a minimum instream flow of 120,500 AF. I don't see how full contract deliveries could be made without impacting Trinity River flows and Trinity Lake storage. Sincerely, Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Public Comments Sought on BDCP Memorandum of Agreement October 27, 2011 - The U.S. Department of the Interior and the California Natural Resources Agency are announcing an opportunity for members of the public to comment on the "First Amendment to the Memorandum of Agreement Regarding Collaboration on the Planning, Preliminary Design and Environmental Compliance For the Delta Habitat Conservation and Conveyance Program in Connection with the Development of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan" (MOA). Comments may be submitted by e-mail to BDO at usbr.gov or by mail to the Bureau of Reclamation, Bay-Delta Office, 801 I Street, Ste. 140, Sacramento, CA 95814. Comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, November 16, 2011. View the following materials for more information: Notice Inviting Public Comment on the BDCP MOA and Establishing Additional Opportunities for Stakeholder Input MOA Press Release White Paper on the 2011 BDCP MOA Text of the First Amendment to the MOA 2009 MOA Effects Analysis Review Materials Now Available October 3, 2011 - The BDCP Effects Analysis Review Materials are now available here. These materials have been prepared by consultants to the BDCP. The public is welcome to review these materials, and prepare comments. Comments should be sent to bdcpcomments at water.ca.gov. No response to these comments will be prepared, but the consultants will do their best to take these comments into account as the draft document is prepared. The earlier the comments are received, the more likely it is that they can be considered. Please see the BDCP schedule for the planned dates of issuance of the draft Effects Analysis documents. A public review draft Bay Delta Conservation Plan is scheduled for release in mid-2012. At that time, all comments received as part of the formal review process will receive responses. Visit the BDCP Effects Analysis Review Web Page and view the BDCP Effects Analysis Review Materials and Supporting Information directly. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 31 14:52:12 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:52:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Articles on BDCP MOU Message-ID: <5061C28C-0C2A-4A57-B4B4-DD3E32162D0E@att.net> http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_19216392?source=rss http://www.insidebayarea.com/opinion/ci_19217877 http://www.lodinews.com/news/article_671d4d91-c8df-5af8-976e-8e474ae5c141.html http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/10/30/MNHD1LN6N1.DTL http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/10/29/18695997.php Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Nov 1 15:11:36 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:11:36 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath dam articles Message-ID: <9986B3DC-9837-4074-A1A1-68B9ABE00D88@att.net> Klamath dam removal uncertain http://www.oregonbusiness.com/articles/105-november-2011/6057-klamath-dam-removal-uncertain By Linda Baker The hydro settlement agreement calls for PacifiCorp to remove four Klamath dams in 2020. Stakeholders are still waiting to move forward on projects connected to the agreements. // Photo by Robert French When the Klamath Restoration Agreements were signed in February 2010, the documents were hailed as a historic solution to decades of conflicts over water rights and environmental management in the Klamath Basin. Almost two years later, many stakeholders are still waiting to move forward with projects connected to the agreements, which include both the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement. At issue is whether legislators will authorize the agreements and allocate the $500 million for implementation. ?We are coming forward at a very difficult political moment,? says James Honey, program director with Sustainable Northwest, a Portland nonprofit that helped facilitate the agreements. Signed by more than 40 groups, including irrigators, tribes, fishermen, conservation groups, and state and local governments, the Klamath agreements underscore the power of collaboration to overcome entrenched conflict, Honey says. But today budget deficits and ?political mudslinging over dam removal? could derail all that. ?It?s all in Congress? hands at this point,? he says. Under the terms of the hydro settlement agreement, PacifiCorp?s four Klamath dams would be removed in 2020. The utility ?is already implementing large portions of the agreement,? including imposing surcharges on Oregon ratepayers to help pay for the removal and ?exchanging engineering drawings with the feds,? says spokesman Bob Gravely. ?But this all hinges on the political side and the ability to secure funding.? The political lines were drawn this fall, starting with the U.S. Department of the Interior?s release of a much anticipated Environmental Impact Statement, which showed that removal of the dams would provide significant economic, environmental, social and cultural benefits. Specifically, the report cited the creation of 1,400 new jobs and additional water for the Klamath National Wildlife Refuge. It also pegged the cost of dam removal at $290 million ? down from the $450 million originally predicted. Despite the findings, key U.S. congressional representatives immediately went on the record against dam removal, which cannot move forward until Congress authorizes both the hydroelectric and restoration agreements. For example, Sen. Tom McClintock (R-California), who last winter lobbied successfully to reduce funding for Klamath dam studies, opposes removal on the grounds that the U.S. is facing skyrocketing energy prices and that the Klamath facilities are a cheap and abundant power source. Another hurdle is the estimated $100 million that cash-strapped California will have to pay for its share of the dam removal costs. Until Congress takes action on the agreements, other projects are also in a holding pattern. ?Parties are doing what they can with what they have,? says Honey, citing as examples fisheries restoration planning and analyses on the part of the Klamath Irrigation Project to figure out ?how to keep farmers farming with decreased water in the future? ? one of the Klamath agreement directives. Had the settlement agreements been in place during the 2010 Klamath drought, ?we wouldn?t have had the economic disaster we did,? says Tara Jane Campbell Miranda, policy coordinator for the Klamath Water Users Association. Under the Klamath agreements, local farmers would have received 385,000 acre-feet of water last year, with an obligation to deliver 45,000 acre-feet to the wildlife refuges, Miranda said. Instead, farmers only received 185,000 acre-feet of water, forcing the federal government to dole out $9.5 million in aid. U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is supposed to make a final determination on dam removal in March 2012, but that decision requires legislation to be in place first. And although Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) has crafted draft legislation, it is unclear when it will be introduced ? or whether it will pass. The stakes are high, Klamath signatories agree. Says Miranda: ?Until legislation is implemented, we won?t have water certainty in the basin.? Read more: Klamath dam removal uncertain - Oregon Business http://www.oregonbusiness.com/articles/105-november-2011/6057-klamath-dam-removal-uncertain#ixzz1cUguWuUd ************************************************************ http://www.calwatchdog.com/2011/10/31/rural-rebellion-brewing/ Steven Greenhut: Rural rebellion brewing By STEVEN GREENHUT SACRAMENTO ? The nearly five-hour drive from the Sacramento area to Yreka, in Siskiyou County by the Oregon border, was a reminder not just of the immense size and beauty of California, but of the vast regional and cultural differences one finds within our 37-million-population state. Sacramento is Government Central, a land of overly pensioned bureaucrats and restaurant discounts for state workers. But way up in the North State, one finds a small but hard-edged rural populace that views state and federal officials as the main obstacles to their quality of life. Their latest battle is to stop destruction of four hydroelectric dams along the Klamath River ? an action driven by environmentalists and the Obama administration. Most locals say the dam-busting will undermine their property rights and ruin the local farming and ranch economy, which is all that's left since environmental regulators destroyed the logging and mining industries. These used to be wealthy resource-based economies, but now many of the towns are drying up, with revenue to local governments evaporating. Unemployment rates are in the 20-percent-and-higher range. Nearly 79 percent of the county's voters in a recent advisory initiative opposed the dam removal, but that isn't stopping the authorities from blasting the dams anyway. These rural folks, living in the shadow of the majestic Mount Shasta, believe that they are being driven away so that their communities can essentially go back to the wild, to conform to a modern environmentalist ethos that puts wildlands above humanity. As the locals told it during the Defend Rural America conference Oct. 22 at the Siskiyou Golden Fairgrounds, environmental officials are treading on their liberties, traipsing unannounced on their properties, confronting ranchers with guns drawn to enforce arcane regulatory rules and destroying their livelihoods in the process. The evening's main event: a panel featuring eight county sheriffs (seven from California, one from Oregon) who billed themselves as "Constitution sheriffs." They vowed to stand up for the residents of their communities against what they say is an unconstitutional onslaught from regulators in Sacramento and Washington, D.C. In particular, they took issue with the federal government's misnamed Travel Management Plan, which actually is designed to shut down public travel in the forests. Plumas County Sheriff Greg Hagwood related the stir he caused when he said he "will not criminalize citizens for just accessing public lands." Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey reminded the crowd that county sheriffs are sworn to uphold the Constitution "against all enemies, foreign and domestic." These are fighting words. Sheriff Dean Wilson of Del Norte County said he was "ignorant and na?ve about the terrible condition our state was in." He came to believe that people were being assaulted by their own government. "I spent a good part of my life enforcing the penal code but not understanding my oath." Wilson and other sheriffs said it is their role to defend the liberties of the people against any encroachments ? even if those encroachments come from other branches of government. As someone who has covered law-enforcement issues in urban Southern California, it's refreshing to hear peace officers enunciate the proper relationship between themselves and the people. Increasingly, law enforcement is based on an authoritarian model, whereby police have nearly unlimited power, and citizens must obey, period. It's rare to hear peace officers who are willing to stand up against more powerful arms of the government in service to their oath to their state and county and who affirm that their job is to protect their citizens' inherent rights. It's even rarer to hear sheriffs complain about the excessive use of force by fellow officers, which was a theme on the panel when referencing federal agents. I could pick nits. For all the complaining about the feds, Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko had just been quoted in the newspaper praising the Obama administration for its crackdown on medical-marijuana clinics, even though California law clearly allows them. One's either for state control or not. I'm tired of conservatives who claim to be for states' rights when it suits them, but against states' rights on issues such as the drug war. Still, it was clear whose side the sheriffs were on regarding a battle that goes beyond the sparsely populated northern regions. The people in Siskiyou were echoing points I've heard throughout rural California. As they see it, government regulators are pursuing controversial policies ? i.e., diverting water from farms to save a bait fish, the Delta smelt, clamping down on carbon dioxide emissions to address global warming even if it means driving food processors out of the Central Valley, demolishing dams to increase a population of fish that isn't endangered ? without caring about the costs to rural residents. When resource-related jobs leave rural areas, there aren't many other ways for residents to earn a decent living. Society collapses, and poverty expands. There aren't enough tourist-oriented gift shops to keep everyone gainfully employed. I hadn't been in Yreka long before someone related a popular joke: A federal agent shows up at a farm and demands to check out the property. The farmer says OK, but tells him not to go over to one pasture. Then the agent arrogantly tells him he has a badge from the federal Environmental Protection Agency and can go wherever he darn well pleases. The farmer says OK. A few minutes later, the agent is running for his life from a bull. The agent calls for help, so the farmer goes to the fence and yells: "Show him your badge." It's funny but anger-inducing. We've got a real sagebrush rebellion brewing in rural California. Urban legislators can ignore it at their own peril. Steven Greenhut is editor of www.calwatchdog.com; write to him at sgreenhut at calwatchdog.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: printButton.png Type: image/png Size: 379 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: emailButton.png Type: image/png Size: 428 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1111_KlamathDam.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 53576 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Nov 1 15:57:22 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:57:22 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Seattle Times- W.Va. meet led to Klamath dam removal, salmon aid Message-ID: <66FC135B-44FF-43BD-8E28-F703B9C860F1@att.net> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2009970174_apusklamathdams.html W.Va. meet led to Klamath dam removal, salmon aid The turning point toward removing four Klamath River dams in Oregon and California to restore struggling salmon runs came in the little Shenandoah Valley town of Shepherdstown, W.Va. By JEFF BARNARD AP Environmental Writer MEDFORD, Ore. ? The turning point toward removing four Klamath River dams in Oregon and California to restore struggling salmon runs came in the little Shenandoah Valley town of Shepherdstown, W.Va. Michael Bogert, an aide to then-Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorn, summoned representatives of PacifiCorp and the governors of Oregon and California to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Conservation Training Center there in May 2008. They would find a way to peace in the Klamath after decades of battling over water, fish, power and farming. "We relicense our hydro projects - that's the regular course of business," PacifiCorp Vice President and General Counsel Dean Brockbank recalled Wednesday after the Portland-based utility announced it had agreed to terms for removing the dams. "In this case, Gov. (Ted) Kulongoski, Gov. (Arnold) Schwarzenegger, and at that time Secretary Kempthorn made it very clear from a public policy point of view that they did not want these dams relicensed. They wanted the dams removed as part of a larger (Klamath) basin settlement and restoration program. "Once that became abundantly clear, we shifted our framework from relicensing to settlement involving a possible dam removal framework." Kempthorn said from Washington, D.C., that he did not initially want the dams removed, but President George W. Bush wanted a resolution to the long-standing water crisis, and he was determined to find an agreement that would be a good business decision for PacifiCorp. "I think that was an attitude change, maybe a game-changer," he said. A key element was the federal government agreeing that some other entity besides PacifiCorp would take out the dams, Brockbank said. "Up until that point, people talked aspirationally about taking dams out," he said. "But PacifiCorp was not going to take the dams out. One of our fundamental negotiating principles was someone else has got to take that burden on." PacifiCorp has agreed to terms for removing four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath that produce enough power for 70,000 customers. If they actually come out sometime after 2020, it will open some 300 miles of river to salmon for the first time in a century. Conservation groups have characterized it as the biggest river restoration effort ever. The utility, a unit of Omaha, Neb.-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., is expected to sign the draft agreement by the end of the year. The deal sets a cap of $450 million for dam removal. Oregon has agreed to a surcharge of $180 million on Oregon customers of PacifiCorp. California must still approve bonds to cover the rest. Meanwhile, PacifiCorp has agreed to spend $500,000 a year for the next 10 years on restoration of coho salmon habitat in California tributaries of the Klamath River. The focus now shifts to getting farmers, American Indian tribes, salmon fishermen, conservation groups and others to sign onto a $1 billion proposal for restoring the Klamath Basin. The draft agreement includes water and power assurances for irrigators in the upper basin, as well as continued farming on the Tule Lake and Lower Klamath national wildlife refuges - terms that have angered some conservation groups worried that they will limit water for fish and block the restoration of wetlands critical to improving water quality. Charles Bonham, California director of Oregon Trout, said the support of everyone in the community is necessary for restoration to work. "We want salmon to be met in Klamath Falls with open arms, not pitchforks," he said. Federal marshals had to be called to Klamath Falls in 2001 to keep farmers from opening floodgates to the Klamath Reclamation Project, which had been closed so scarce water could be devoted to threatened salmon during a drought. When the Bush administration restored irrigation the next year, tens of thousands of adult salmon died in the lower river, stranded by low water in warm pools where they were vulnerable to disease. In 2006, poor returns to the Klamath forced authorities to practically shut down salmon fishing in the ocean off California and Oregon, triggering appropriations from Congress for millions of dollars in disaster assistance to fishermen. "Society has been incurring great costs already outside the basin for these unresolved issues within the basin," said Mike Carrier, policy director for Kulongoski, the Democratic Oregon governor. Not all tribes and conservation groups are happy with the way things are going. "The (agreement) allows PacifiCorp to stall dam removal until a date when all naturally spawning salmon in the river could be dead," Hoopa Tribal Chairman Leonard Masten said in a statement. "We cannot afford to wait that long." Oregon Wild is fighting the deal's link to assurances of steady water supplies for a federal irrigation project and continued farming on two national wildlife refuges. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Thu Nov 3 17:58:04 2011 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:58:04 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Policy - Public Workshop Nov 8, 2011: 9 am at the TPUD in Weaverville Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A7A0EC8D1@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Hello Trinity River Restoration enthusiasts - This is a reminder that there will be a public workshop on Nov 8, run by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, to introduce their proposed Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Policy. The meeting will be held at the local Trinity Public Utility District Office on Nov 8 from 9 am until 11 am. The goal of the proposed Aquatic Restoration Policy is to provide greater permitting certainty to those qualifying Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Projects (AERPs) that result in a temporary discharge of waste to waters of the State. The adoption of this policy by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board would likely help in getting more restoration work on the ground and may serve as a template for other California regions to adopt. This could have some great ramifications for restoring your favorite water course. I have attached a description of the policy and the Waterboard's public announcement . Links to these documents are available from the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoast/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/aquatic_ecosystem_restoration_policy.shtml#aep Please pass this information to others that may be interested, try to attend, or write a letter to support the action. NOTE: The comment period has been extended until Nov 18, 2011. Best Regards- Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 111003_ceqa_RestorationPolicy.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 85947 bytes Desc: 111003_ceqa_RestorationPolicy.pdf URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 111003_PublicWorkshop_RestorationPolicy[1].pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 18033 bytes Desc: 111003_PublicWorkshop_RestorationPolicy[1].pdf URL: From erobinson at kmtg.com Fri Nov 4 08:30:14 2011 From: erobinson at kmtg.com (Robinson, Eric) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 08:30:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Policy - Public Workshop Nov 8, 2011: 9 am at the TPUD in Weaverville In-Reply-To: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72A7A0EC8D1@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Message-ID: <44769DDD2CF0CC48BA74D1681D8C7FEE0DF70EBE@mail.kmtg.kmtgnt.com> The policy should clarify that fish passage improvement projects, like fish ladders, qualify as aquatic restoration measures whose short-term contruction effects are insignificant in light of their long-term environmental benefits. Fish ladders and other aquatic resource habitat improvement measures should receive favorable permitting/certification/CEQA treatment, so that they get timely done. ________________________________ From: env-trinity-bounces+erobinson=kmtg.com at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+erobinson=kmtg.com at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.u s] On Behalf Of Gutermuth, F. Brandt Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 5:58 PM To: Trinity List serve (env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us) Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Policy - Public Workshop Nov 8, 2011: 9 am at the TPUD in Weaverville Hello Trinity River Restoration enthusiasts - This is a reminder that there will be a public workshop on Nov 8, run by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, to introduce their proposed Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Policy. The meeting will be held at the local Trinity Public Utility District Office on Nov 8 from 9 am until 11 am. The goal of the proposed Aquatic Restoration Policy is to provide greater permitting certainty to those qualifying Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Projects (AERPs) that result in a temporary discharge of waste to waters of the State. The adoption of this policy by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board would likely help in getting more restoration work on the ground and may serve as a template for other California regions to adopt. This could have some great ramifications for restoring your favorite water course. I have attached a description of the policy and the Waterboard's public announcement . Links to these documents are available from the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoast/water_issues/programs/basin_pla n/aquatic_ecosystem_restoration_policy.shtml#aep Please pass this information to others that may be interested, try to attend, or write a letter to support the action. NOTE: The comment period has been extended until Nov 18, 2011. Best Regards- Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 7 10:42:42 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 10:42:42 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding Record Searchlight- Siskiyou sheriff's life-and-death rhetoric alarms tribes, environmental groups Message-ID: Siskiyou sheriff's life-and-death rhetoric alarms tribes, environmental groups By Ryan Sabalow Posted November 5, 2011 at 11:22 p.m. http://www.redding.com/news/2011/nov/05/lopey-siskiyou-klamath-scott-shasta/ PHOTO BY ANDREAS FUHRMANN // BUY THIS PHOTO Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey talks to audience members recently at the Defend Rural America event at the Siskiyou Golden Fair grounds in Yreka. PHOTO BY ANDREAS FUHRMANN Bob and Dusty Copeland, ranchers in Shasta Valley, attend the Defend Rural America event held recently at the Siskiyou Golden Fair grounds in Yreka. PHOTO BY ANDREAS FUHRMANN Redding councilman Patrick Jones (right) talks to Matt Fowler of Ono, vice president of the Shasta County Cattlemen's Association, at the recent Defend Rural America event at the Siskiyou Golden Fair grounds in Yreka. "What they do here could happen in Shasta County in a year," Fowler said. "Agencies like Fish and Game are using Siskiyou County as a testing ground." Documents Klamath River watershed Related stories Tensions mount in idyllic Siskiyou County in fight over dams, salmon DFG sued on all sides over Shasta, Scott rivers' coho YREKA ? At a recent rally of at least 700 farmers, tea party members and conservative activists, Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey spoke in almost revolutionary terms, framing the actions of federal and state regulators as threats the county's livelihood. His message drew hearty applause from the audience, many of whom feel literally under attack. But it worries American Indian tribe members, fisheries regulators and environmentalists in a legal and policy fight to protect salmon. They say the rhetoric might inflame a tense situation, leading to possible retaliation from those who might take Lopey's message too far. Lopey, a retired Army Reserve colonel who served in Afghanistan, likened efforts at dam removal and restrictions on irrigation water and access to public forest land to friendly fire. The crowd cheered when he said he was sworn to protect the U.S. Constitution and the citizenry from all enemies, "both foreign and domestic." "We are, right now, in a fight for our survival," he told them. "We are fighting not only for ourselves. More importantly, we're fighting for the survival of our counties, of our local communities and our children and our grandchildren. If we don't save things like agriculture and we let them take our water and land and push us off, we won't have any public safety. We'll have no quality of life. We'll have nothing." At his side were seven other sheriffs from Northern California and Southern Oregon, including those representing Shasta, Tehama and Trinity counties. Each later echoed Lopey's concerns that environmental regulation is causing a direct threat to their constituents' safety. 'A potential for violence' The sheriffs' life-and-death rhetoric alarms and frustrates those on the other side of the debate, who say their push to protect threatened coho salmon runs by removing dams along the Klamath River and changing water use practices on its Scott and Shasta rivers tributaries already had led to tense situations before the tone of the debate changed and the sheriffs got involved. Now, they're worried the heated talk could lead to retaliation or intimidation from those who believe they have the support of the counties' top law enforcement leaders. "Any time people feel like they have backing from local elected officials, it's more intense," said Molli White, a Karuk Tribe member and representative of the Klamath Justice Coalition. "I think there's definitely a potential for violence." Even before the tone of the debate grew so heated, tribal members made sure never to drive around some parts of Siskiyou County in vehicles showing the tribal insignia out of fear they'd be harassed, she said. State game wardens say they, too, have been getting "vague" threats for at least a year, although so far no one has acted on them. At least one Scott Valley rancher, 59-year-old Mark Baird, says he and others are willing to take things "as far as the state wants to take it," in their fight to protect their way of life, although he said he hopes it doesn't escalate to violence. "The coho is being used to destroy our economy and our way of life just the way the spotted owl was used," Baird said. "They're not going to do that here. The people here will fight for their property. Period. ... How far are we willing to go? That's up the government. How far do they want to push it?" Lopey defends remarks Lopey says he's actually striving to "defuse the tension." "What I'm doing ? what all we're trying to do ? is avert violent confrontations," Lopey said. He said he's merely trying to raise awareness and make state and federal regulators heed his county's concerns and coordinate with local officials when they hash out and implement their plans, as required by law. He lists off a litany of ways he believes federal and state fisheries officials have violated locals' rights since he took office in 2010. These include, he said, entering ranchers' properties without search warrants, intimidating them and "stealing" their constitutionally protected right to their deeded water. As an officer charged with protecting public safety, he says he's worried the "ridiculous, stupid policies forced upon" his community based on what he believes to be poor science will balloon his county's already high unemployment rates. If that happens, he says, he sees crime and drug use raging out of control as more jobs are lost and the tax base that pays for his deputies shrinks. He said the agencies and regulators need to understand what's at stake in his county, where the timber-based economy already was decimated in the mid-1990s in a fight over logging spotted owl habitat. Now, it's fish the environmental groups value more than hardworking people's livelihoods, Lopey said. "I love fish and wildlife. I'm an outdoors guy, but I care more about my people in my county than the fish," Lopey said. " ... Frankly, I contend these farmers are the best conservationists. They do a better job at conserving the land than a lot of these other groups." DFG director rebuffs lopey Although he says federal agencies also are violating his county's rights, the largest target of Lopey's ire is the state's Department of Fish and Game. Responding last month to a letter Lopey had sent demanding the agency coordinate with Siskiyou County officials, DFG Director Charlton H. Bonham bluntly rebuffed Lopey's legal assertions that the DFG has an obligation to consult with local officials on "all programs, activities or projects that could impact Siskiyou County's economy or social programs." "The department must protect and preserve the fish and wildlife resources of the state for the benefit of all of the public and future generations," Bonham wrote. "This requirement is reflected in numerous provisions embodied in the California Constitution, many statutory provisions and in judicial decisions rendered throughout the state's history. I understand you may object to resource protection laws under policy grounds, but as a law enforcement matter, the department looks forward to your continued cooperation as an officer of the law." Bonham also sent a copy of his letter to Siskiyou County's attorney, Thomas P. Guarino. DFG Assistant Chief Mike Carion said his wardens have heard of "vague threats" for about a year, although not from a particular person or group. He said the rhetoric has intensified and grown more politically charged during that time, making wardens' jobs more difficult. Because wardens are charged with enforcing laws that protect fish, they've been trying to find a way to get ranchers and farmers to use irrigation water in ways that don't drain the salmon-sustaining Scott and Shasta rivers dry when the fish need it most, he said. "We're not looking to take people to jail," Carion said. "We're just trying to get them into compliance (with the law)." Compounding the challenges, Carion said, wardens also are taking legal heat from all sides, having been sued by both the farmers and environmental and fisheries groups over the DFG's water-diversion enforcement policies. The farmers contend the DFG is being too strict. The coho groups allege the agency isn't regulating enough. Both cases are pending. 'Blatantly obvious' where Lopey stands Erica Terence, conservation and executive director of Orleans-based Klamath Riverkeeper, said fish are protected under laws and constitutional statutes, something she thinks Lopey and his fellow sheriffs choose to forget. She said that while no one wants to see the farmers lose their livelihoods, others' livelihoods also are at stake in the fight over coho, including commercial and recreational fishermen and the tribes who harvest the salmon that come down the Klamath from the Scott and Shasta rivers. "The bottom line is everybody's got to follow some rules, including in Siskiyou County," Terence said. Lopey's politically charged speech follows a pattern of intimidation toward people who don't share the county leaders' point of view, seeming to "elevate the rights of some people over the rights of others," she said. "That doesn't seem American to me," Terence said. She said she and other environmentalists worry Lopey and his deputies won't enforce the laws with which they disagree. That includes protecting the environmental groups when they voice their opinions. Before an August public meeting in Fort Jones, she said, wardens told her they'd provide security because they didn't think Lopey's deputies would defend the environmentalists if a confrontation broke out "because it's so blatantly obvious the sheriff has taken a very political stand." Lopey called that allegation "a blatant, unprofessional, very inaccurate statement" from an "activist group" his deputies have investigated for trespassing on farmers' land to take pictures of their water diversions. "I will protect the rights of an environmental activist so long as they are following the law," Lopey said. Lopey said he wants to have a good working relationship with fisheries managers and wardens, but it's up to them to coordinate with him to discuss what's in the best interest of his community. "I'm trying to defuse the tensions," Lopey said. "I'm trying to listen to everybody's views. But these federal and state agencies, they don't get it. They're not listening." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 520111105215322001_t607.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 66861 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 520111105215304003_t160.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 6453 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 520111105215311001_t160.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 9811 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Nov 8 07:56:21 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 07:56:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update week of October 31 to November 4, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all, The latest from our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey is available here http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries We mapped 346 redds last week. Talk to you later, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 9 10:30:01 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 10:30:01 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- Tensions Mount in idyllic Siskiyou County in fight over dams Message-ID: <1E482B6C-06BE-4608-A0E9-AAD612CEF963@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2011/nov/05/mainbar-klamath-siskiyou-lopey-salazar-scott-shast/?print=1 Tensions mount in idyllic Siskiyou County in fight over dams, salmon By Ryan Sabalow Saturday, November 5, 2011 YREKA ? Just a few quiet miles off Interstate 5 in northern Siskiyou County it's hard to imagine deep ideological divisions and political demagoguery threaten to turn a dispute over fish habitat, dam removal and farmers' water rights into a battleground. On the east side of the freeway north of Weed you'll find the Shasta River meandering through fields surrounded by hundreds of rolling hills. They're brown this time of year, perhaps covered with a dusting of frost or fresh snow. Cows feed among the juniper and ancient lava rock. To the west in the hidden Scott Valley, the brilliantly green and snow-capped Marble Mountains hug hay fields fed by the Scott River. Elk and black-tailed deer are almost as common a sight as ranchers' cattle. To the north, the two streams pour into the Klamath, a meandering green waterway that passes through canyons and miles of evergreen forests before dumping in the white-capped waves of the Pacific. At certain times of year, the river's mouth is packed gunwale to gunwale with boats carrying Indian tribe members checking their gill nets and rod-and-reel-toting anglers hoping a silver-sided, pink-fleshed salmon tugs on their line. In this rural area, native fishing practices and farmers' irrigation ditches that pull water from the streams date back before cars, before planes, before polyester, before television. Yet outside attention is turning toward this idyllic region for reasons other than its timeless beauty and traditions. Disputes over removing four dams farther east on the Klamath and irrigation practices on the Scott and Shasta tributaries have catapulted the sparsely populated area to the center of a national debate over dam removal, farmers' rights and threatened salmon runs. "We have become a little bit of a Petri dish," said Erica Terence, conservation and executive director of Klamath Riverkeeper, an Orleans-based environmental group that advocates protecting threatened coho salmon on the Scott and Shasta rivers by tearing down the dams and limiting farmers' use of irrigation water. What's at stake Environmental groups like Terence's, along with biologists and fishing groups, say the dispute on the Klamath could be a sign of things to come elsewhere in the West. They say global climate change is warming creeks and shrinking snowpack, making dams and antiquated systems that divert streams for irrigation a direct threat to entire salmon runs, hurting tribes who depend on salmon harvests and recreational and commercial fishing. Farmers say they're already struggling to pay their bills and can't afford to change their irrigation habits. They also doubt the environmental groups' claims that their water use is draining the creeks. They contend that happens during dry years whether or not they irrigate. Siskiyou County's politicians also condemn the dam-removal plans, saying federal regulators have reached a foregone conclusion they need to be destroyed, while downplaying flooding risks and the loss of local power generation as well as other threats to agriculture, recreation, wildlife and the surrounding economies. Last year more than 40 groups, including some farmers above the dams, environmentalists, American Indian tribes and the dams' owners signed an agreement to explore tearing them down. But the county's population in the last election overwhelmingly endorsed a toothless referendum condemning that plan. Other than the Republican politicians who represent the area, those in the federal or state governments blatantly ignored the county's voice, said Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey. "They're attacking Siskiyou County and the people of Siskiyou County," Lopey said. "They're ganging up on us." Lopey points to a September speech given in San Francisco by Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. President Barack Obama's natural resources chief described the benefits of removing the four Klamath dams appearing to far outweigh the negatives. While saying he was still gathering public input on the proposal, Salazar called those who continue to oppose the removal plans "naysayers" set on derailing a hard-fought deal. Flowing downstream In his speech, Salazar said reports show the costs of removing the dams is about $160 million cheaper than originally projected and would be a major boon to the river's health and for the coho and chinook salmon and steelhead that swim upstream. In addition, Salazar said, dam removal would create close to 4,600 jobs over 15 years, help agriculture and bolster the surrounding economy. The risks of dam removal local officials fear would be "mitigated and controlled," he said. If the dam-removal plans are approved, the most optimistic estimates say they won't be taken down until at least 2020. In the weeks after Salazar's speech, Lopey helped gather conservative activists from all over Northern California and the West to protest what they see as powerful, well-funded special interest groups and government agencies attacking the struggling county of 45,000 people, nearly one in five of whom are unemployed. At the inaugural Defend Rural America event last month in Yreka, hundreds of tea party members and local officials from several north state counties, including Shasta and Tehama, and other Western states showed up in support of Siskiyou County's cause. They watched a documentary and heard a panel of eight Oregon and Northern California sheriffs, including Lopey, voice worries that increased federal and state intrusion and environmental regulation threaten to cripple their communities. Outside of Siskiyou County, farmers, local sheriffs, conservative activists and politicians say they believe the tactics used by environmentalists and government regulators in Siskiyou County to tear down the dams and regulate farmers' water may be applied elsewhere in the state. "We have a couple of dams as well," Trinity County Sheriff Bruce Haney told the crowd at the Defend Rural America rally. "This is why it's so important for us to be sitting here as well, united." Already in Shasta County, farmers are alarmed at a plan federal fisheries regulators recently announced to count the number of barriers salmon face as they swim up Cow Creek. The farmers fear that will turn, eventually, into a water grab. State and federal biologists adamantly deny such claims. "All the things tie together," said Shasta County Supervisor Les Baugh. "Every problem, every challenge they're having with regards to water will later flow downstream to us." 'Set up for conflict' Each side of the debate believes scientific evidence and the law ? including the state and federal constitutions ? support their point of view. Terence, the environmentalist at Klamath Riverkeeper, said she carries a pocket-size Constitution everywhere she goes. But few invoke the Constitution with as much vehemence as Scott Valley rancher and tea party activist Mark Baird. The 59-year-old airline pilot, radio station owner and vice president of Scott Valley Protect Our Water goes to public meetings with a copy of the document tucked into a holster on his belt. He said some of the farmers in his valley have water rights stretching back to the time before California was a state. They have a right to their water, their property, in the same way people have a right to use the garages they bought when they purchased their homes, he said. "How can you conduct your life one day to the next not knowing if the property you own today can be taken tomorrow?" he said. But Clayton Creager, senior scientist overseeing the Klamath River for the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, said he hopes a solution can be reached so farmers can use their water more efficiently, making sure fish have enough to survive. He notes there are some farms on the Shasta River already making progress on such fronts. The problem, he said, is long ago water rights were awarded without thought to how much was actually available."There's more water rights than there is water," Creager said. " ... I'm not trying to belittle anybody's argument, but we're inherently set up for conflict." Craig Tucker, Klamath campaign coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said it doesn't have to be. He points to the diverse groups, including the Karuk, that came together to support the dam removals. He hopes something similar can happen in the Scott and Shasta valleys. "This issue of water use, of how to share it among the different users, is increasingly an issue for the West and the world," he said. "I don't think we're a model for river restoration. I think we're a model for how diverse rural communities can work out a compromise to exist together." But Tucker's optimism goes only so far. He said such compromises are becoming harder and harder to reach given the deep political divisions driving the debate. "It's really frustrating. The partisanship, from the county level to the national level, it's ruining America," Tucker said. "The kind of dialogue we're getting out of people ... that's not solving it. It's making it worse." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: header_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5276 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 9 10:38:32 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 10:38:32 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- opinions on TRRP Message-ID: TRRP: Resist nature speed-up http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-11-09/Opinion/TRRP_Resist_nature_speedup.html FROM M. VAUGHN LEWISTON Engineered log jams. No! Gravel augmentation. No! Please, Trinity River Restoration Program, resist temptation to speed up nature with gravel and log augmentation. Your meetings to educate have no impact on people who, like me, have experience and gut feelings, and know the plans are wrong. Stop trying to force the river to meander with your engineering. These efforts to speed up nature are not needed. Our Trinity is a river canyon with a unique ecosystem that includes rapids, deep holes and bedrock river bottoms. Your designs obliterate these features. Please remove the vegetation along the river edge that accumulates sediment and creates further and further build-up of land into the waterway. Our river is choked. This vegetation removal is necessary because the river no longer dries up in summer and fall ? the vegetation is constantly watered and too healthy from a historic perspective. Stressed, and dead, vegetation would fall in the river in high water and the woody debris your agency advocates for the river, would be there for the fish. Nature will do its own engineering if your agency fixes the largest man-made river problems: removal of over-vegetation and noxious weeds. http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-11-09/Opinion/Native_fish_stocks_in_question.html Native fish stocks in question FROM HERB BURTON LEWISTON In response to D. Johnson?s letter (?TRRP playing in sandbox,? Oct. 26 Journal), as a riverfront property owner it must be frustrating dealing with the TRRP and their ?guesses.? Based upon years of controversial guesses and failed river projects (side channels, notching, gravel injections, river channel modifications, etc.), it obviously generates major concern. From a fisheries perspective, ever wonder what it may be like for ?native? salmon and steelhead stocks struggling to survive throughout the targeted upper reach, Trinity River Lewiston Dam-North Fork, when the TRRP is a major threat? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 9 07:44:14 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 07:44:14 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping summaries- through 11/4 References: <4EBA292F.1B1D.0039.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: <667BB5E9-099C-4848-A9DA-A6CE4713A98A@att.net> From: Wade Sinnen Date: November 9, 2011 7:18:40 AM PST To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Trinity River trapping summaries- through 11/4 Folks, The attached spreadsheet has the latest trapping totals for Willow Creek weir (sample total) and Trinity River Hatchery (total count). Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Environmental Scientist Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 84992 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Nov 12 09:38:45 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:38:45 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com Editorial: Sheriffs wiser to shun divisive political fight Message-ID: <9EA8524D-FAA0-44EB-AE78-3634B95AD25F@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2011/nov/11/sheriffs-wiser-to-shun-divisive-political-fight/?partner=RSS Editorial: Sheriffs wiser to shun divisive political fight Posted November 11, 2011 at midnight Sheriff Jon Lopey is right. In his speech at a recent Tea Party-sponsored event, "Defend Rural America," Lopey introduced a panel of what organizers called "Constitution Sheriffs" with a stemwinder about the need to fight back against overbearing environmental regulations, to find a balance that will allow a healthy local economy. He called that not just a business issue but a public-safety issue. After all, without jobs to keep people productively and legally occupied and tax revenues to pay deputies, a sheriff's job is all that much harder. We don't disagree with his points. The question is whether a sheriff is the right person to sound the battle cry. Should Lopey ? or a whole panel of sheriffs ? be enlisting with one side in a heated political conflict? No ? especially when that battle verges on being more than metaphorical. Last year Fish and Game canceled one Siskiyou County public meeting citing fears of "armed civil disobedience." Lest this be dismissed as the worry of out-of-touch state bureaucrats, earlier this year supporters of Siskiyou County farmers were privately suggesting that a "war" was likely in the Scott and Shasta valleys. A lot of hyperbolic talk? The fruit of heated emotions? Everyone would like to think so. But with this kind of talk in the air, a county's chief law enforcement officer ought to strive to live up to the noble name of "peace officer," ought to remain a voice of calm above the fray. The environmental groups and Indian tribes that are pushing for tighter protections for salmon even if it means new irrigation restrictions ? a minority position, surely, in Siskiyou County ? might be getting carried away when they talk about fearing violence and a lack of protection from local law enforcement. But that talk is a sign of the extraordinarily tense climate. Smart law enforcement leaders would be working to douse that fire, not piling the logs higher. Look, the appeal of winning sheriffs' backing for a political fight is obvious, as is their First Amendment right to speak their mind if they please. They are the highest-profile local officials elected in most counties, and they're generally a well-respected bunch. But part of their respect stems from their independence. Yes, they run for office and hear their constituents' voices ? but their job is to enforce the law, not leap into the political back-and-forth. Boosters of the Defend Rural America event touted the sheriffs involved, including Dave Hencratt of Tehama County and Tom Bosenko of Shasta County, as "Constitution Sheriffs" ? part of a libertarian-minded movement that celebrates local sheriffs as the last defenders of freedom against federal tyranny. We don't love every decision the federal government makes, but last time we checked this "tyranny" is operating with the democratic consent of the governed and under the checks and balances that the nation's Founders wisely established and that have kept America free from actual tyranny for more than two centuries. If local sheriffs start deciding that they can pick and choose what laws they feel apply in their jurisdiction, that the Constitution means what they and not the courts say it does, they are walking a dangerous path. Hard times, lean budgets and new duties that Gov. Jerry Brown has passed onto counties are making sheriffs' jobs more than challenging enough. Yet they seem intent on adding divisive politics and constitutional crusades to the mix. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Nov 12 10:01:36 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 10:01:36 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Dam Removal Legislation Introduced Message-ID: Redding Record Searchlight: http://www.redding.com/news/2011/nov/11/drive-begins-to-aid-salmon/ San Jose Mercury News: http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_19306650 Eureka Times Standard: http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_19314134 Klamath dam removal legislation introduced; supporters face 'uphill battle' in Congress Donna Tam/The Times-Standard Posted: 11/11/2011 02:39:50 AM PST With implementation legislation introduced -- a milestone in the path to the Klamath dam removal project -- advocates will now have to convince legislators to pass the bill before a March deadline. Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and Congressman Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, jointly introduced the Klamath Basin Economic Restoration Act in the Senate and House Thursday, asking Congress to approve spending $750 million to restore salmon habitat and guarantee water for Klamath basin farm irrigation. ?There's pretty strong Republican opposition to this bill, and I think we have a far better chance of having it passed in the House,? Thompson said. ?I think it's critically important that we get the bill out there so we can begin the debate and can focus our attention on this. We can explain to our House members who are not supporting the bill why that's the wrong position to have. ... I don't know of any Democrats or Republicans that would not jump at the chance to improve fishing, improve farming and create more than 4,000 jobs.? The Klamath Basin Economic Restoration Act authorizes the implementation of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) and the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA). The two agreements, signed in 2008 after years of fighting among parties in the Klamath Basin, lays out a plan for removal. The legislation language also covers tribal rights, water allocations and sets the distribution of revenue from the Tule Advertisement Lake National Wildlife Refuge and the Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge. ?This legislation is proof that through collaboration and hard work we can move beyond the disputes of the past and create a stronger foundation for economic growth,? Merkley said in a news release. ?This legislation will provide a brighter future for the Klamath Basin -- putting people to work and improving the economy for farmers and fishermen alike.? The legislation is key to U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar's determination on the proposed project. Salazar has until the end of March to decide if the dam removal project, which removes four dams from the Klamath River and initiates restoration work, is in the public interest. If passed, the legislation would approve both agreements and authorizes Salazar to sign and implement the KBRA, implement the KHSA and take the necessary steps to move the agreement forward; changes or establishes federal policy to assist implementation of the agreements; and establishes a process to plan for and implement dam removal. Craig Tucker, a spokesman for the Karuk Tribe -- one of the parties to the agreement -- said supporters of the project are hoping for a legislative hearing to clear up what he said are misconceptions about the project. He said the dams do not provide irrigation to farms currently, and the dams will not affect the water supply in areas like Scott Valley. ?I think we clearly have an uphill battle passing this through Congress, but it's been an uphill battle every step of the way,? Tucker said. Supporters, which include farmers, fishermen and tribes, have pointed to the economic benefits of the project and its role in avoiding catastrophes like the 2002 fish kill or the 2006 commercial salmon fishing closure. Detractors have voiced concern over the removal's effect on the property owners closest to the dams, issues surrounding water rights and cost. The bill has 15 cosigners -- mostly Democrats -- so far. A sticking point for Republicans is the project's price. According to Thompson's office, the total cost of removing the dams and embarking on the environmental restoration is estimated to be $536 million in federal funds, which will be matched by $550 million in non-federal funds. Tucker said $200 million will come from ratepayers, but it is a nominal amount compared to the more than $500 million that ratepayers would be stuck with if the dam was relicensed and retrofitted instead. Congressman Tom McClintock, R-Granite Bay, a staunch opponent of the project, said in a statement that the cost will be a large obstacle for the bill being passed in the House. He said ?the effort to tear down four perfectly good hydroelectric dams at enormous cost to ratepayers and taxpayers is insane.? McClintock is the chairman of the Water and Power Subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee. The bill will most likely go before his subcommittee. ?Fortunately, congressional approval is necessary to move forward,? he said in his statement. ?The full House voted earlier this year against proceeding with the Klamath dam removal. That precedent, and a $13 trillion national debt, speak volumes on the chances of this legislation passing in the House over the next year.? Thompson said he doesn't think McClintock's stance on the Klamath River is in the best interest of the residents who are affected by it. ?Tom McClintock doesn't give a hoot about our fisheries or our fishing families, and I think it's not only terribly provincial on his part -- how dare this guy allow a community to suffer the way our community has suffered, because he doesn't think we should do, in this case, what's right,? he said. Thompson said he wasn't concerned about the bill making its way through the subcommittee McClintock chairs ?Tom McClintock is not a significant voice on public policy. He's against anything,? he said. ?He's not somebody you can work with. He's beyond libertarian ... he's an anarchist.? Agreement parties hope that Congress will see that the bill is not about Republicans or Democrats but about the blue-collar work force in the Klamath Basin. ?This bill is a marked departure from past attempts by one interest group to strongarm one another,? said Jeff Mitchell, the lead negotiator for the Klamath Tribes, which is also a party to the agreement. ?Instead, we've set aside ideological debates and focus on protecting everyone's interest collectively. It's exactly the type of win-win policy Congress should embrace.? To see the bill, agreements, or the project's environmental impact report, visit www.klamathrestoration.gov. Donna Tam can be reached at 441-0532 or dtam at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Nov 12 10:04:50 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 10:04:50 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Siskiyou_Daily_News-_Interior_resp?= =?windows-1252?q?onds_to_Board_of_Supervisor=92s_letters?= Message-ID: <04B77573-B8DD-4CB2-998E-D373371F9DEE@att.net> Interior responds to Board of Supervisor?s letters http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/topstories/x76452845/Interior-responds-to-Board-of-Supervisor-s-letters Yreka, Calif. ? The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) on Nov. 4 sent a letter to the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors in response to three letters the board sent to DOI regarding the potential removal of four hydro-electric dams on the Klamath River. In the letter, John Bezdek, special advisor to the chief of staff, Office of the Secretary, told the supervisors that he ?respectfully disagrees? with the assertions the board has made in regard to the DOI?s alleged misconduct in the Secretarial Determination Process regarding dam removal. In late September and early October, the board of supervisors sent three letters to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. The letters stated that the DOI lacked coordination with county government, alleged illegal practices by the DOI and expressed the board?s belief that the decision to remove the Klamath River dams has already been made. Concerning accusations that the DOI has failed to coordinate with county government and the belief that the decision to remove the dams has already been made, Bezdek?s letter states, ?No decision regarding facilities removal has been made. The Department of the Interior has consistently reached out to the county on numerous occasions over the past several years in meetings with the full board (including three public meetings where I have personally testified before the board), individual supervisors and technical staff. In short, we have met with the county every time you have asked for a meeting and we will continue to do so throughout the entirety of this process.? Attached to the letter was a list of communications exchanged between county government and federal employees engaged in the Secretarial Determination process. The list documents 19 occasions since April 2010 when federal representatives either met in person with county government or county representatives attended federally sponsored hearings, workshops or meetings. The list also cites eight communications between federal and county government via email or telephone calls. Regarding the board?s allegations that the DOI is in violation of the coordinating provision of United States Code, Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA) at 43 USC ? 1712(c), the letter states, ?That provision of FLPMA applies only when the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is developing or revising its land use plans ... neither of which is the case here. Simply put, our science and environmental process is about the potential removal of four privately owned dams on the Klamath River, something that is not a BLM resource management planning exercise.? The letter also addresses the board?s assertion that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS/EIR) for Klamath Facilities Removal does not disclose discrepancies between the proposed action and the Siskiyou Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). ?I respectfully disagree with this assessment. The county?s LRMP does an excellent job of describing the historical land and water uses and the development of Siskiyou County,??the letter states. ?However, it fails to assert future intent or plans for lands managed by the county. Because the future plans are not known, the DEIS/EIR cannot make any statements regarding possible conflicts between the proposed action and any possible future county plans.? When asked for his reaction to Bezdek?s letter, Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors Chairman Jim Cook said, ?I am very disappointed in the secretary?s response. It is clear that he does not intend to fulfill his requirements under federal regulations. I am not particularly surprised at this. Since reviewing the EIR/EIS, it is clear that his department has not even made a minimal effort to meet scientific and environmental standards for such a review.? On Oct. 18, the Daily News reported that the board had sent a letter to Salazar requesting an extension of the 60-day comment period for the DEIS/EIR because the county needed more time to review the massive document. ?We have received no response to the extension request,? Cook said. ?A study of this magnitude merits additional time to review, and such time is necessary for the secretary to honor his promise of transparency. Obviously, the county will now need to explore other options to force the department to meet those federally established coordination requirements.? The final paragraph of Bezdek?s letter acknowledges that the DOI has received the request for an extention and states, ?We will take your request under advisement.? Bezdek concluded the letter by saying, ?I recognize we have not fully resolved many of the issues that separate us, but failure to reach agreement does not mean the department has failed to consult and coordinate on these important issues.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 14 09:58:56 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 09:58:56 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Two different views on Klamath Dams Message-ID: Redding Record Searchlight Editorial: 'Perfectly good' dams? Klamath's are anything but Posted November 13, 2011 at midnight http://www.redding.com/news/2011/nov/13/editorial-perfectly-good-dams-klamaths-are-but/?partner=RSS North Coast Congressman Mike Thompson's introduction of legislation in the House of Representatives to knock down four Klamath River dams and spend upwards of a billion U.S. taxpayer dollars restoring the river is a reminder of just how costly an endeavor the Klamath agreements are. If for no other reason than the sums involved, the plans deserve the closest possible scrutiny to ensure the public is getting its money's worth ? even if it can be difficult to pin down a precise dollar value on coho and clean water. But if Democrat Thompson and the dam busters' plan is expensive, at least it attempts to deal with the real world in 2011. The Republican congressmen who represent inland Northern California? Not so much. Rep. Tom McClintock, whose district includes the upper reaches of the Klamath Basin in Modoc County, has repeatedly argued that "to tear down four perfectly good hydro-electric dams at enormous cost is insane." Well, yes, it would be insane if they were perfectly good dams. They are not. It was in 2007 ? under that den of environmental radicals known as the George W. Bush administration ? that federal resource agencies, in compliance with the law, insisted that relicensing Pacific Power's four dams on the long-troubled river would require installing fish passages. It was the Federal Energy Regulatory Agency, which is not a sub rosa branch of the Sierra Club but routinely renews dam licenses, that found that the dams would be money-losers if they complied with today's laws. It was Pacific Power ? the dams' corporate owner, which has a bigger stake than anyone in keeping them operating ? that decided its best bet was to let their license lapse and dismantle them. Perfectly good dams? If they were, they'd have been relicensed long ago, as so many of PG&E's dams are. These are dams with obvious problems. Rep. Wally Herger, meanwhile, can wax downright poetic about the "marvels of engineering" that harnessed the West's wild rivers to supply the irrigation water and electricity that helped build modern society. Far from removing any dams, the congressman argues, we need more of them. Well, in a few strategic locations ? the long-discussed Sites Reservoir in Colusa County is one of them ? we might well need more dams to store water in a state where it's increasingly scarce. But it's not 1961, it's 2011. Time has taught us that dams have not just benefits ? which are very real ? but also costs. It's no criticism of the pioneers who laid the foundation on which modern California rests, but they made a few bad calls along the way. Not every bucket of concrete our ancestors poured was in the right place and meant to remain for all eternity. Indeed, some of the mistakes they made led to the passage of the very environmental laws that are now creating legal pressure to knock down the dams. Do the Klamath settlements represent the best feasible future? Is spending $800 million on the Klamath River the best use of the American taxpayers' money? That's a difficult case that proponents still need to persuasively make, to the affected public and to Congress. But skepticism about solutions shouldn't mean nostalgic denial about the problems. Unfortunately, that's all Northern California's conservative congressmen seem to have to offer. http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/opinions/letters_to_the_editor/x1846686160/District-4-Supervisor-Grace-Bennett-My-personal-view-of-the-KBRA District 4 Supervisor Grace Bennett: My personal view of the KBRA By Grace Bennett Siskiyou Daily News Posted Nov 03, 2011 @ 08:40 AM Yreka, Calif. ? I recently attended a meeting to explore the new ERI for dam removal on the Klamath River. Three minutes isn?t enough time to speak about all of the information you wish to present, so here are the rest of my comments: Many people believe that if the Klamath River dams are removed, all of this clear, cold water will suddenly appear and go rushing down the river ? this is not the case. The water that comes from Oregon to California is the problem. This water is the source of the pollution. The natural phosphorus from the soil around the Upper Klamath Lake causes algae to grow. This lake is shallow, gets warm in summer and has many nutrients and organic matter in it. To increase storage they are talking about flooding the wetlands around the Upper Klamath Lake. This will only add more phosphorus because the phosphorus is in the soil. Once the water leaves the Upper Klamath Lake it picks up more pollution from Klamath Falls, Ore. as the city puts their treated sewer water into the river. A few more miles down river, water is returned from the farming community and wildlife refuges. This water between Keno and the Copco Dam is the most polluted in the system, according to Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) reports. The most recent study from the NOAA Fishery states that the salmon will have to be trapped and hauled around this area of the river after dam removal. The Copco and Iron Gate dams help settle the phosphorus and organic matter, and the water is cleaner when it leaves Iron Gate than when in enters. There are 84 streams that enter the river below Iron Gate to dilute this nasty water; the dams hold and settle the nutrients and phosphorus. These 84 streams provide 471 miles of great habitat for spawning fish, plus the 263 miles of the Klamath River; this surely should be enough area for the fish to use as spawning grounds. Over the past 20 years, there has been a concentrated effort to improve habitat and restore salmon in the Klamath River. Weir dams have been removed from tributaries, new pumping stations installed, ditches have been lined to improve water supplies, fish screens added to all ditches and irrigation practices have been analyzed and changed to improve crop production and use less water. Logging practices have been drastically changed to protect water sheds. Streams have been fenced so cattle aren?t in the streams; this makes the streams narrower, thus lowering temperatures. Many experiments have been tried; some have worked and some haven?t. These numbers are estimated. The Siskiyou County Road Department has completed over 62 projects since 2008 to improve fish access to these streams. The Siskiyou Resource Conservation District (RCD) has completed over 1,200 projects, and the Shasta Valley RCD, starting in 1986, completed over 1,500-plus all of the work the farmers, ranchers and loggers have done to improve their land. The fish populations have not increased, millions of tax dollars have been spent, and now the next grand effort is to take out the dams on the Klamath River. Over the past few years the federal government has spent $50 million a year in the Klamath Basin for environmental and management programs. If the decision is made that the dams are to be removed and the Congress of the United States passes legislation to enact the KBRA, over a billion dollars will be spent on still more restoration projects over the next 10 years. According the KBRA, this is where this money will be spent and the jobs will be created for the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Oregon Department of Fish and Game, the BOR, California Department of Fish and Game. Several more federal and state agencies have plans to spend $63 million on restoration projects on the Sprague, Williamson and Wood rivers; $67 million for the fringe wetlands around Upper Klamath Lake and fish diversions for the Keno Dam; $92 million for water conservation and ground water management; $47 million is budgeted for acquisition of lease of water rights, water conservation and land management programs; and $7 million for modification of dikes on the Wood River. A total of $385 million would support implementation of the water deal ? things like paying for farmers to idle land and not farm, provide lower power rates to pump water, $65 million for tribal economic development and environmental management; each tribe will also get $14 million for fisheries management. The Salmon River restoration group will get $10 million for their projects. The Klamath tribe would like fishing rights on the Klamath River from Iron Gate to Interstate 5. This tells me that they don?t expect the fish to get to Klamath Falls where their territory is, and they also get $21 million to purchase the Mozama Forest. The wildlife refuges get more water. There is $100 million budgeted to acquire water on a year-to-year basis for environmental needs. And in all of this, there are no provisions to improve the quality of the water after it has gone through the Klamath Project and the Wildlife refuges and is returned directly to the Klamath River. No provisions to restore the lakebeds after the dams are removed. No provisions for repairing the road below the dams used to haul off the debris of the dams. No provisions to remove the sediment that will be allowed to wash down the river suffocating spawning grounds. No provisions for flood control; the dams give us nine hours to prepare for a flood event. No provision to make the water line for the city of Yreka safe. No provision for the protection of the Shasta Tribal burial sites and their ceremonial site, which are under the lakes. This is a tremendous amount of tax dollars to be spent with very little hope of it helping the water quality and quantity of the Klamath River. Is there a local company that can take out the dams? Probably not; there goes another $450 million to an outside contractor. Where are all of these jobs that have been talked about? It seems to me that the money goes to government agencies, tribes and a few so called nonprofit organizations. There is a fish bypass designed that would allow fish to go past the dams and spawn in the upper part of the river. This would cost $5 million. Wouldn?t it be better to see if this works before taking out the dams? Dam removal only provides about 25 miles of new habitat for the fish because there is no scientific evidence that the salmon ever went above Spencer Creek. Hatcheries have doubled their output of smolts; returns have not improved. Maybe the problem isn?t the dams, water quality, or quantity; maybe it is the ocean where the salmon spend two-thirds of their lives. Get ready ? in a few years after dam removal you will need a lot more money because you will need an EPA super fund to clean up the Klamath River system. The people of Siskiyou County deserve better; we are the ones who will have to suffer the consequences of dam removal and problems that are left behind. I am tired of being in the middle of some one else?s experiment. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Wed Nov 16 08:07:02 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:07:02 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update week of November 7 to 10, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all, The latest mid-season update from our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey is available here http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries We mapped 553 redds last week. Data are undergoing QA/QC and numbers from some of the previous weeks have been edited. Those are subject to further change as we carefully scrutinize our data. See you on the river! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 16 08:35:47 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:35:47 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Wet year, lower diversions boost lake Message-ID: <7578DB2D-B459-4206-ADBC-D5430BBB3B65@att.net> Wet year, lower diversions boost lake http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-11-16/News/Wet_year_lower_diversions_boost_lake.html BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL As forecast, the 2011 water year was a wet one for the Trinity River basin with an inflow to Trinity Lake of 1,780,800 acre-feet, according to a water year summary from the Trinity River Restoration Program. The water year runs from October through September. Inflow to the reservoir was the highest it?s been since the extremely wet year of 2006 when inflow was 2,396,500 acre-feet. Average yearly inflow is 1,254,000 acre-feet. Of the 1,780,800 inflow in 2011, 721,800 acre-feet of water was released to the Trinity River for fisheries and 10,800 acre-feet was released for tribal ceremonial purposes. Another 473,100 acre-feet of water was diverted for Central Valley Project use. Typically in a wet year more water is diverted south for CVP use, but the last couple of years diversions have been limited by work on power plants, said Larry Ball, operations supervisor for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in the North State. Under the Trinity River Record of Decision signed in 2000, about half of the inflow to Trinity Lake is released to the Trinity River. In wet years a lower percentage of the inflow goes down the river, and in dry years a higher percentage is released to the river with the remainder available for CVP use. Ball noted that amount being diverted to the tunnels now -- 1,587 cubic feet per second on Monday -- is higher than usual. Trinity Lake is very high for this time of year, and a ?comfort zone? is needed for the winter months, he said. It?s not a bad problem to have. ?Some years you don?t have enough water,? Ball noted. Long term, from 2000 to 2011, 45 percent of the average inflow has been released to the river for fisheries while 6 percent has been released to the river for other reasons, primarily the safety of dam releases when Trinity Lake rises too quickly during a very wet winter. During that same time period, 57 percent of the average inflow was diverted to the Sacramento River. The combined release was 107 percent of average annual inflow. The five-year average for 2007 through 2011 water years was 47 percent of average inflow for the release to the Trinity River for restoration purposes and 39 percent diverted to the Sacramento River, for a combined total release of 86 percent. The percentages above or below 100 percent are possible due to changes in reservoir storage across water years. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 16 08:38:06 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 08:38:06 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Conner Creek bridge replacement Message-ID: Here is a good example of fishery restoration work- not likely to fail like side channels. Go Five Counties! http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-11-16/Front_Page/Conner_Creek_bridge_replacement.html Conner Creek bridge replacement The third section of the bridge is lifted over trees in the bridge replacement project. PHIL NELSON | THE TRINITY JOURNAL Parts of a new bridge are lifted from a truck and lowered into place over Conner Creek at the Conner Creek Road crossing in Junction City on Oct. 29. The new bridge will allow passage of fish whereas the culvert it replaced had become a complete barrier to juvenile fish, according to the project manager, David Colbeck of the Five Counties Salmonid Conservation Program. The work is being done by the Trinity County Department of Transportation. Work on a second Conner Creek crossing at Red Hill Road is planned for next year. The new crossings will also accommodate higher flows. The project is funded by multiple agencies, including the U.S. Forest Service, state Department of Fish and Game, National Marine Fisheries Service and Trinity County. The cost for both Conner Creek sites is to be $450,000. The second section of the bridge is lifted from the truck, which then pulled away in case the lift went awry. The third section of the bridge is put in place. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1p1.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11058 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1p2.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11471 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1p3.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10762 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Wed Nov 16 10:16:00 2011 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 10:16:00 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group Meeting December 2011 Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group is scheduled to meet in December. The meeting topics are listed below. Best regards, Vina [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2011)] [Notices] [Page 70751] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 2011-29420] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2011-N237; FXFR1334088TWG0W4] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a TAMWG meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG will meet from 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Friday, December 9, 2011. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Trinity County Library, 351 Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Randy A. Brown, TAMWG Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Robin Schrock, Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623-1800; email: rschrock at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a meeting of the TAMWG. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: Key questions for Restoration Program guidance and assessment, Channel rehabilitation program review and planning, Gravel augmentation program, Watersheds work program, TRRP budget update, Hatchery practices review, Fish marking, Executive Director's report, Trinity Management Council Chair's report, and Designated Federal Officer topics. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. Dated: November 8, 2011. Randy A. Brown, Deputy Field Supervisor, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2011-29420 Filed 11-14-11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Nov 17 12:00:21 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:00:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Reclamation Releases Draft Environmental Assessment for Buckhorn Dam/Grass Valley Creek Toe Drain and Channel Rehabilitation Project Message-ID: <53B3E454-487F-45EA-A7C6-55F53C0DE462@att.net> Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-11-173 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: November 17, 2011 Reclamation Releases Draft Environmental Assessment for Buckhorn Dam/Grass Valley Creek Toe Drain and Channel Rehabilitation Project The Bureau of Reclamation and Trinity County Resource Conservation District have released for public review a Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study for the Buckhorn Dam/Grass Valley Creek Toe Drain and Channel Rehabilitation Project, about 13 miles southeast of Weaverville, Calif., near the Buckhorn Summit. The Buckhorn Dam/Grass Valley Creek Toe Drain and Channel Rehabilitation Project (Project) would involve excavation of the Buckhorn Dam outlet channel to allow lowering of surface water elevations for measuring water seepage through the earthen dam, as required in dam safety protocols. During construction, Reclamation proposes to create additional off-channel juvenile holding habitat for coho salmon and steelhead that are common in the area. The constructed habitat will provide slow water refuge in proximity to vegetation and large wood cover habitat. The Project construction is proposed for the summer of 2012. The Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and can be viewed online athttp://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=8562 or on the Trinity County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD) website at http://www.tcrcd.net. If you encounter problems accessing the document online, please call 916-978-5100 (TTY 916-978-5608) or e-mail mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov. Written comments must be received by close of business Friday, December 16, 2011, and should be mailed to Alex Cousins, Trinity County Resource Conservation District, P.O. Box 1450, Weaverville, CA 96093. Comments may also be faxed to Mr. Cousins at 530-623-6006, or e-mailed to acousins at tcrcd.net. For additional information or to request a copy of the Draft EA/IS, please contact Mr. Cousins at 530-623-6004. Copies of the draft document may also be viewed at the Trinity County Library, 211 Main Street, Weaverville; Reclamation?s Trinity River Restoration Program Office, 1313 S Main Street, Weaverville; or the TCRCD Office, #3 Horseshoe Square, Weaverville. # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Nov 18 19:02:26 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:02:26 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Bay Delta Plan agreement opposed by 242 groups References: <82D5E5D4-5463-4034-909F-A112420DAD07@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: From: Dan Bacher Date: November 18, 2011 5:52:03 PM PST Subject: Bay Delta Plan agreement opposed by 242 groups http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/11/18/bay-delta-plan-agreement-opposed-by-242-groups/ This letter features probably the most extensive, diverse list of organizations ever mobilized in defense of our fish populations and waterways in California history. moalettertosalazarandlairdfinal.pdf download PDF (5.5MB) Bay Delta Plan agreement opposed by 242 groups by Dan Bacher An unprecedented 242 environmental organizations, environmental justice groups, Native American Tribes, recreational angling organizations, commercial fishing groups and outdoor businesses sent a letter on November 16 to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and California Natural Resources Secretary John Laird urging them rescind a controversial Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). The state-federal BDCP aims to build a peripheral canal or tunnel to export more water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to corporate agribusiness and Southern California. Delta advocates believe it would lead to the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon, Sacramento splittail and other imperiled species ravaged by record water exports from 2003 to 2006 and in 2011. The list of logos of organizations, tribes and businesses signing the letter alone is six pages long. This letter features probably the most extensive, diverse list of organizations ever mobilized in defense of our fish populations and waterways in California history. For example, Tribes signing the letter include the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, Karuk Tribe and Modoc Nation. Environmental groups signing the letter include the Environmental Water Caucus, Sierra Club, Friends of the River, Restore the Delta, Save the American Association, Planning and Conservation League, California Water Impact Network, North Coast Environmental Center, and Environmental Protection Information Center. Commercial fishing groups include the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, Small Boat Commercial Salmon Fisherman's Association and Half Moon Bay Trollers Association. Recreational angling groups and businesses include Water for Fish, the Golden Gate Salmon Association, Coastside Fishing Club, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Northern California Council Federation of Fly Fishers, California Striped Bass Association, Kokanee Power, Black Bass Action Commiteee and the Fish Sniffer magazine. And these organizations are just a fraction of the 242 featured on the letter. The groups, businesses and Tribes wrote, "The MOA was negotiated behind closed doors and only serves to reinforce the growing awareness that the BDCP is biased in favor of the export water contractor?s agenda to increase exports from the Delta and its connected rivers, despite the documented negative impacts those exports have had on endangered fish species, Delta habitats, water quality and public trust values. Our concerns are similar to the October 24 letter you received from Congressmen Miller, Thompson, Matsui, McNerney, and Garamendi on the same subject." (http://www.c-win.org/content/dan-bacher-california-representatives-slam-closed-door-bay-delta-process.html) "We understand that MOAs are a regular aspect of the HCP and NCCP process. Nevertheless, this MOA makes unacceptable concessions to the exporters? substantive agenda to influence the analytic process, extends no surprises guarantees to contractors in clear conflict with current law, and elevates the contractors to the status of permit holders for public works projects owned and operated by state and federal agencies," the letter continued. "We are deeply disappointed that the Obama and Brown Administrations have acquiesced to the export contractors? efforts to twist what should have been a straightforward financing agreement for planning into a negotiation vehicle to successfully secure unprecedented influence over the HCP/NCCP process," the letter states. The letter concludes, "We request that you rescind this biased and unjustified MOA and prepare a new agreement that fairly includes the interests of all parties, including NGO?s, Delta residents, farming and business organizations, environmental justice groups, recreational and commercial fishing organizations, and Native American Tribes. In the absence of such a fundamental rewrite, the undersigned organizations have little alternative but to oppose continuance of the BDCP process. Bill Jennings from the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Tom Stokely of the California Water Impact Network, Dick Pool from Water for Fish and the Golden Gate Salmon Association, Mark Rockwell of the Endangered Species Coalition, and Nick Di Croce and David Nesmith from the Environmental Water Caucus were instrumental in obtaining the 242 signatories to the letter. Credit must go to Bill Jennings for masterminding the sign-ons for this amazing achievement. In addition to the unified group letter, organizations also sent letters of their own to oppose the state-federal plan to build the canal. For example, Dick Pool, President of Water for Fish, sent a strongly-worded letter to Salazar and Laird. "This agreement corrupts the entire Bay Delta Conservation Plan and assures that there will only be one result of that plan - the export of additional water to the agricultural and Southern California interests at the expense of the water needs of the salmon, the Delta environment and every other water user in California," wrote Pool. "You are destroying any pretense of an open and transparent process that includes the interests of all the concerned parties including the salmon fishing industry. By doing this, it is our belief you are setting the stage for the extinction of the Central Valley salmon. By their past actions, it is very clear that the water exporters are unwilling to give up the water that salmon need to survive. You are giving them the power to destroy the salmon and 23,000 jobs in the industry," Pool concluded. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: unknown.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 195043 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Nov 19 09:44:29 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 09:44:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping summaries References: <4EC6895D.1B1D.0039.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: From: Wade Sinnen Date: November 18, 2011 4:36:38 PM PST To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Trinity River trapping summaries Folks, The attached spread sheet contains the latest trapping data at Willow Creek weir. We are still very busy at Trinity River Hatchery and have not had time to enter the most recent data. Still trapping fair numbers of fall Chinook salmon at the weir, somewhat unusual for this time of year. We plan to keep the weir in through November, river flows allowing. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Environmental Scientist Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 85504 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Nov 19 15:04:28 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 15:04:28 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard-Comment period for Klamath dams removal environmental report extended to Dec. 30 Message-ID: Comment period for Klamath dams removal environmental report extended to Dec. 30 The Times-Standard Posted: 11/19/2011 02:19:02 AM PST http://www.times-standard.com/ci_19372532?IADID=Search-www.times-standard.com-www.times-standard.com The deadline for comments on the Klamath dams removal project's environmental impact report has been extended to Dec. 30, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced Friday. Dennis Lynch, program manager for the Secretarial Determination on Klamath River dam removal, said the deadline was extended to give the public more time to review the environmental impact statement (EIS) and environmental impact report (EIR) documents. The document will help U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar decide if the project is in the public interest. Salazar has until the end of March to decide on the project, which removes four dams from the Klamath River and initiates restoration work. ?The decision to remove or retain four Klamath River dams is of immense importance to the many Klamath Basin communities,? he said in a news release. ?In addition to the peer-reviewed science and the environmental analysis, public comments on the draft EIS/EIR is also an important and critical component in shaping this decision. The Department of the Interior and the California Department of Fish and Game listened to the numerous requests to extend the comment period on this lengthy draft EIS/EIR and determined that it is in the best interest of the public to give additional time to review and comment.? The draft environmental impact statement and report -- containing environmental and economic analyses related to the removal project and subsequent restoration programs -- fulfills a major condition of the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, which was negotiated among state, local, tribal and water provider leaders to remove four dams from the Klamath River. The public comment period was scheduled to end on Monday. Fish and Wildlife spokesman Matthew Baun said the service has received about 2,000 comments so far and is in the process of compiling and organizing them into 20 or so broad categories including engineering, biological, water quality, economics, recreation and real estate. Proponents of the project, including dozens of groups that signed the agreement, said the reports validate the project and its economic and environmental benefits. The agreement invests more than $700 million in the Klamath Basin over the next 15 years. Proponents said the plan protects and enhances a natural resource that is worth more than $750 million a year to the local economy. Humboldt County's submitted comments argue that the reports actually underestimate the economic benefits to Humboldt. The EIS estimates the creation of 4,600 jobs regionally, with more than 300 of those jobs in Humboldt. ?The (Humboldt County) board wishes to underscore that implementation of the agreements will provide a significant boost for sustainable jobs and economic productivity for Humboldt County and other coastal counties,? said the board's written comment. ?We believe the analysis in the EIS/EIR likely underestimates this economic benefit.? The agreement's detractors, such as the Hoopa Valley Tribe and the Resighini Rancheria, said the environmental report is inadequate and argue that water quality and availability was not sufficiently examined. The Hoopa Valley Tribe believes the dam's operator, Pacifcorp, would be forced to remove the dam itself if the relicensing process were to take its course. The tribe's attorney, Tom Schlosser, said the relicensing process is delayed by the California State Water Board and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. ?Nowhere in the 8,000 pages of the document and appendix do the drafters disclose that the most direct route to dam removal is the no-action alternative,? he wrote in an email to the Times-Standard. ?Unlike the preferred proposal of the EIS, the no-action alternative does not require expensive legislation and it will not terminate tribal rights.? Pat Higgins, a fisheries consultant for the Resighini Rancheria, a tribe located in Del Norte County, agrees. The tribe is arguing that the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, which was signed in conjunction with the hydroelectric settlement, terminates tribal rights and is ?ecologically insufficient.? ?Had the government retained alternative 8 -- full facilities removal without the KBRA -- we would have favored it,? he wrote in an email to the Times-Standard. ?Instead, we support the no action alternative, because we believe the KBRA will do more harm than good.? Baun said all the comments will be addressed in the final report expected to be released early next year. ?The federal team is going to look at the comments and put a response together for the final EIS,? he said. ?It's a bit premature right now to respond to those.? _____________________________________ How to comment: * online at www.klamathrestoration.gov. * send to: Ms. Elizabeth Vasquez, Bureau of Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825, or by fax to 916-978-5055 or email klamathsd at usbr.gov. * send to: Gordon Leppig, California Department of Fish & Game, 619 Second Street, Eureka, CA 95501, or by fax to 441-2021 or email ksdcomments at dfg.ca.gov. ___________________________________ Donna Tam can be reached at 441-0532 or dtam at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Nov 19 15:07:16 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 15:07:16 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard Opinion- Rick Dowd, Resighini Rancheria Message-ID: <509D5F8D-A593-40DD-A77D-2C4CE446B081@att.net> Klamath Dam removal linked to very bad restoration agreement Rick Dowd/For the Times-Standard Posted: 11/18/2011 02:39:14 AM PST http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_19364130 Members of the Resighini Rancheria strongly object to the approach taken by the federal government and the state of California for Klamath River dam removal. We are a small, federally recognized Indian Tribe with a reservation in Del Norte County upstream of Highway 101 on the Klamath River. We have been studying the Klamath Hydroelectric Project Facilities Removal Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for several months and want to inform the community about major problems we have discovered. Comments on the DEIS/DEIR are due Monday. The DEIR/DEIS leads up to a secretary of Interior decision in March 2012 which, if affirmative, will not only carry out the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) that removes dams but also the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA). The KBRA is very damaging to Indian rights and will not bring about restoration of the Klamath River. We were excluded from Klamath settlement discussions that lead to the KBRA and KHSA, as were the federally recognized Quartz Valley Indian Reservation and Del Norte County. The Hoopa Valley Tribe participated in the settlement talks but refused to sign the KBRA because they would have to expressly give up their water and fishing rights. Both our rights, and theirs, to protect our fisheries and water quality will be terminated by the secretary of Interior if he makes an affirmative decision (KBRA 15.3.9). Those who are not KBRA and KHSA Advertisement signatories (parties), such as nonnparty tribes and Del Norte County, will be unable to participate in committees that govern the management of the Klamath River until 2062. This arrangement is undemocratic and of questionable legality under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Despite the fact that an affirmative secretarial decision will implement the KBRA, the environmental report does not examine the cumulative effects of its water allocation, stream flow projections and water pollution impacts. The DEIS/DEIR claims that the KBRA is insufficiently defined to analyze its effects, which is untrue. Among other things, it allocates a minimum of 330,000 acre feet of water to Klamath Project irrigators, subsidizes their power costs with $92 million in tax dollars, and allows farming on 20,000 acres in Tule Lake and Lower Klamath National Wildlife refuges for 50 years. The DEIS/DEIR failure to analyze cumulative effects from the KBRA and operation of the Klamath Project is a patent violation of both National Environmental Policy Act and the California Environmental Quality Act. The Chinook Expert Panel hired as part of the KBRA process noted that the KBRA had no credible plan to resolve water pollution problems. The experts stated that the Keno Reservoir reach of the Klamath River would continue to be an anoxic dead zone for weeks a year and that salmon wouldn't jump through it even after dam removal: ?Without solving the water quality problems, a fully self-sustaining run of chinook salmon to the upper basin is unlikely.? The Resighini Rancheria and Hoopa Valley Tribe both favor speedy Klamath Hydroelectric Power dam decommissioning but oppose the current approach that is joined to implementation of the KBRA. If the government had not discarded Alternative 8 from consideration, which is KHP facilities removal without the KBRA, then the Resighini Rancheria would have favored that option. Instead we will comment in favor of the no action alternative, with a return to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing process. The proponents of the KBRA say that FERC has never ordered a dam removed and that dam removal can come only with the KBRA, their flawed Settlement Agreement. FERC may not require dam removal, but its relicensing process can set up conditions that make project operation uneconomic. An example is the Condit Dam, on the White Salmon River in Washington, which was abandoned by PacifiCorp and decommissioned on Oct. 26 of this year. Unlike the KBRA, the related Settlement Agreement would have no negative impact on existing tribal water and fishing rights. The National Marine Fisheries Service requirement for installation of $230 million fish ladders, if KHP dams remain, cause the KHP to fall into uneconomic status. Furthermore, the California State Water Resources Control Board will not issue 401 Certification as required by the Clean Water Act and Federal Power Act; therefore, PacifiCorp will not receive a new license and will have to abandon and decommission. Comments can be submitted electronically at http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR/feedback. For more information on the DEIS/DEIR, Klamath River ecological restoration and the newly introduced authorizing legislation that we oppose, see our website: www.klamather.org. Rick Dowd is Resighini Rancheria chairman. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Sat Nov 19 19:43:55 2011 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 22:43:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard Opinion- Rick Dowd, Resighini Rancheria Message-ID: Interesting?. However, though I have great respect for Chairman Dowd and the Resighini Rancheria residents, there are nonetheless a number of serious problems and outright errors with his analysis of the KBRA in this article below, including the following: No ?Terminations? of Any Non-Party Tribe?s Rights: While there are some strictly voluntary water right settlements mentioned in the KBRA only by the signatory Party Tribes to the KBRA, no non-Party like the Reshigini?s can be bound in any way by what is essentially just a long-term habitat restoration contract if they did not sign that contract. The so-called ?terminations? of the Resighinis rights they fear will just not happen ? it is a pure fiction. This fact is also made clear in the Klamath Basin Economic Restoration Act (S. 1851 and H.R. 3398) that will implement the deal. Here is a direct quote from that bill language: ?Sec. 106 (l). NONPARTY TRIBES OF THE KLAMATH BASIN UNAFFECTED ? Nothing in this Act or the Restoration Agreement amends, alters, or limits the authority of the federally recognized tribes of the Klamath Basin, other than the Party Tribes, to exercise any water rights the tribes hold or may be determined to hold.? While it is true that the federal government cannot sue other Tribes in the basin over the KBRA on behalf of other non-Party Tribes, being the Trustees for them all, and cannot in essence ?sue itself? to overturn the KBRA when the federal government is itself going to be a Party, and so has to do what is called ?recusing? itself from participating in any such lawsuit, this is a far cry from any sort of rights ?termination.? Nothing prevents the Resighini Rancheria from hiring their own lawyers to enforce those rights if they want to ? this is done all the time, whenever a Tribe sues the federal government, since the feds cannot both represent themselves and simultaneously act as a Trustee for the suing Tribe against themselves in Court. KBRA Provisions are Misstated: Several statements made in this article about what the KBRA actually does are simply wrong. The 330,000 acre-feet the Klamath Irrigation Project will have to live within in the future is a ? ceiling,? not a ?floor? or minimum; while there is some money in the KBRA budget to help partially finance a renewable energy project in the upper basin, this is nowhere near the amount stated, nor is most of this money a ? subsidy? any more than any other type of federal energy development funding; and the refuge leaselands system was created and has been allowed continuously by Congressional statute (the Kuchel Act, P.L. 88-567 (U.S.C. 695n)) since 1964, nearly 46 years before the KBRA existed, nor will the KBRA have anything to do with whether or how long that program remains ? only a separate Act of Congress could change that prior statute. There are also other such errors I need not go into here. These errors are the result of simplistic "sound bite" criticisms and not any real analysis. Correcting Upper Basin Water Quality Problems are Separately Being Addressed Under the Clean Water Act: There are numerous well-known water quality problems in the upper Klamath Basin, but the KBRA ? which is really just a long-term restoration contract, remember ? is not the appropriate tool to address those problems. These problems are all already being addressed separately under the Clean Water Act and equivalent state water quality protection laws, including recently legally approved pollution control standards (TMDLs) in the upper basin intended to solve these water quality problems over time. Blaming the KBRA for NOT being the Clean Water Act is preposterous. What the KBRA would do, however, is bring something like $75 million additional dollars over the next 15 years to fully fund these already ongoing upper basin TMDL and state cleanup programs, jump-starting the implementation of these solutions by at least a decade. The Likely Outcome of Returning to the FERC Process May Not Be Four Dam Removal: Opponents of the Klamath Settlement Agreements have a touching faith in the willingness of state water agencies in both states (remember, one of the dams is in Oregon) to go directly against ? and win in every court and every appeal, on every key issue ? against the entire litigation might of the Hydropower Industry, which would surely see a first-time ever actual 401 certification denial in the Klamath as a major precedent to be fought at all costs. Those of us who are Parties to the Settlement simply have much less faith in that process and want to see the dams come down sooner and with far more certainty. Opponents of the Klamath Settlement should remember that the odds are strongly stacked against dam removals resulting from the FERC and State 401 Certification process. Not only has FERC never yet ordered a dam down against the wishes of a relicensing Applicant in its entire history, no STATE water quality agency has ever ?just said no? outright to a water quality certification application attached to a FERC license application and made it stick in court. Setting such a precedent would guarantee many years of litigation and expense, with appeals in all the state and federal courts for many years, with no certain outcome ? except that the dams would continue to run just as they are now, on annual license extensions, for as long as that litigation could be strung out (10-15 years at least are the best estimates from litigation counsel familiar with this process). PacifiCorp also has VERY deep pockets to fund litigation ? all their litigation costs are considered routine costs of doing business that are fully funded by its ratepayers. During all that time of ongoing litigation, without the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) there would also be NO ?interim measures? such as those required by the current KHSA to protect the fish in the meantime (with the exception of those few measures required under the PacifiCorp HCP, if any -- but all the other KHSA ?interim measures? would disappear with the KHSA). One possible ? potentially likely ? outcome of such an extended court fight from reversion to the FERC process would be that PacifiCorp would ultimately retain at least the J.C. Boyle Dam in Oregon. Because this dam IS in Oregon, the clean water laws that apply to it are much weaker than in California, the Oregon Water Quality Commission is much less willing to ?go to the mat? on this issue and get sued, the J.C. Boyle dam is by far the most valuable of the four dams for power production since it produces by far the most power (80 MW capacity), the water quality problems it creates are the least difficult to clean up, and furthermore it is likely the least costly of the dams to retrofit to modern FERC standards for relicensing. Losing the KBRA also means: losing up to 130,000 acre-feet of additional water in the Klamath River every year as compared to the current status quo; losing all benefits of a guaranteed water supply for the upper basin National Wildlife Refuges, letting them go dry in many years as they do today; losing the Klamath Tribes their only opportunity to reclaim the Mazama Forest as once again Tribal lands; losing most of the more than 100,000 acre-feet of additional wetlands restoration and natural storage under Sec. 18 of the KBRA, which will also benefit fish; losing the Klamath Project ? irrigation cap,? the first time the Klamath Irrigation Project has ever been legally limited in the water it can take for irrigation and; losing some $75 million in water quality monitoring and clean-up funds to implement the upper basin TMDLs much faster than would otherwise be the case, and; losing all the benefits of a 50-year aggressive watershed and salmon habitat restoration program in the Klamath Basin. Just taking the dams down, most biologists agree, will simply NOT be enough to truly revive the basin?s salmon runs. The water reforms and multiple watershed restoration benefits of the KBRA will also be necessary. In Summary: Settlement opponents should be VERY careful what they wish for if they are thinking about jettisoning the current Klamath Settlement and the high degree of certainty of four-dam removal plus major watershed improvements and water reforms it provides for. The chances of accomplishing four-dam removal, plus all the many restoration efforts the KBRA also provides, plus major water reforms to reverse years of water over-appropriation the KBRA also provides for, plus multiple other benefit of the KBRA, would all likely be MUCH worse (or zilch) under a FERC-only recourse. Under the FERC-only approach, you might well still get the dams down -- in 15 or 20 years -- but not accomplish lasting salmon restoration. Anyone who has more questions on the above, or on the KBRA-KHSA Settlement Agreement generally, should feel free to contact me PERSONALLY. I would be glad to discuss or debate these issues in a more appropriate forum. I am always hesitant to inflict such discussion on open forms such as this one. I hope those who are simply not interested in this issue will forgive me the intrusion. (smiling) ============================================= Glen H. Spain, NW Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 O:(541)689-2000 -- Fax:(541)689-2500 Email: fish1ifr at aol.com Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) In a message dated 11/19/2011 3:07:26 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, tstokely at att.net writes: Klamath Dam removal linked to very bad restoration agreement Rick Dowd/For the Times-Standard Posted: 11/18/2011 02:39:14 AM PST _http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_19364130_ (http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_19364130) Members of the Resighini Rancheria strongly object to the approach taken by the federal government and the state of California for Klamath River dam removal. We are a small, federally recognized Indian Tribe with a reservation in Del Norte County upstream of Highway 101 on the Klamath River. We have been studying the Klamath Hydroelectric Project Facilities Removal Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for several months and want to inform the community about major problems we have discovered. Comments on the DEIS/DEIR are due Monday. The DEIR/DEIS leads up to a secretary of Interior decision in March 2012 which, if affirmative, will not only carry out the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) that removes dams but also the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA). The KBRA is very damaging to Indian rights and will not bring about restoration of the Klamath River. We were excluded from Klamath settlement discussions that lead to the KBRA and KHSA, as were the federally recognized Quartz Valley Indian Reservation and Del Norte County. The Hoopa Valley Tribe participated in the settlement talks but refused to sign the KBRA because they would have to expressly give up their water and fishing rights. Both our rights, and theirs, to protect our fisheries and water quality will be terminated by the secretary of Interior if he makes an affirmative decision (KBRA 15.3.9). Those who are not KBRA and KHSA ____________________________________ Advertisement ____________________________________ signatories (parties), such as nonnparty tribes and Del Norte County, will be unable to participate in committees that govern the management of the Klamath River until 2062. This arrangement is undemocratic and of questionable legality under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Despite the fact that an affirmative secretarial decision will implement the KBRA, the environmental report does not examine the cumulative effects of its water allocation, stream flow projections and water pollution impacts. The DEIS/DEIR claims that the KBRA is insufficiently defined to analyze its effects, which is untrue. Among other things, it allocates a minimum of 330,000 acre feet of water to Klamath Project irrigators, subsidizes their power costs with $92 million in tax dollars, and allows farming on 20,000 acres in Tule Lake and Lower Klamath National Wildlife refuges for 50 years. The DEIS/DEIR failure to analyze cumulative effects from the KBRA and operation of the Klamath Project is a patent violation of both National Environmental Policy Act and the California Environmental Quality Act. The Chinook Expert Panel hired as part of the KBRA process noted that the KBRA had no credible plan to resolve water pollution problems. The experts stated that the Keno Reservoir reach of the Klamath River would continue to be an anoxic dead zone for weeks a year and that salmon wouldn't jump through it even after dam removal: ?Without solving the water quality problems, a fully self-sustaining run of chinook salmon to the upper basin is unlikely.? The Resighini Rancheria and Hoopa Valley Tribe both favor speedy Klamath Hydroelectric Power dam decommissioning but oppose the current approach that is joined to implementation of the KBRA. If the government had not discarded Alternative 8 from consideration, which is KHP facilities removal without the KBRA, then the Resighini Rancheria would have favored that option. Instead we will comment in favor of the no action alternative, with a return to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing process. The proponents of the KBRA say that FERC has never ordered a dam removed and that dam removal can come only with the KBRA, their flawed Settlement Agreement. FERC may not require dam removal, but its relicensing process can set up conditions that make project operation uneconomic. An example is the Condit Dam, on the White Salmon River in Washington, which was abandoned by PacifiCorp and decommissioned on Oct. 26 of this year. Unlike the KBRA, the related Settlement Agreement would have no negative impact on existing tribal water and fishing rights. The National Marine Fisheries Service requirement for installation of $230 million fish ladders, if KHP dams remain, cause the KHP to fall into uneconomic status. Furthermore, the California State Water Resources Control Board will not issue 401 Certification as required by the Clean Water Act and Federal Power Act; therefore, PacifiCorp will not receive a new license and will have to abandon and decommission. Comments can be submitted electronically at _http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR_ (http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR) /feedback. For more information on the DEIS/DEIR, Klamath River ecological restoration and the newly introduced authorizing legislation that we oppose, see our website: _www.klamather.org_ (http://www.klamather.org/) . Rick Dowd is Resighini Rancheria chairman. = -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Sun Nov 20 08:38:10 2011 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 08:38:10 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Hoopa Valley Tribe comments on SD-EIS Message-ID: <4EC92CF2.2090608@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clip_image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10134 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: HVTComments_SDEIS_FINAL 11-18-11.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 3934229 bytes Desc: not available URL: From windhorse at jeffnet.org Sun Nov 20 11:07:22 2011 From: windhorse at jeffnet.org (Jim Carpenter) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 11:07:22 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard Opinion- Rick Dowd, Resighini Rancheria In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001301cca7b7$a3d9de80$eb8d9b80$@org> Downstream tribes, upper basin ranchers; there will always be opponents to the clear majority in support of the two agreements, but it?s still the best we have for going forward, or going anywhere for that matter. Some will never be persuaded. Consensus is a wonderful thing and kept the Hatfield Group together for a decade, but sometimes you just can?t get everyone on board. It?s time for action. GiveThanks for the abundance we have. Jim From: env-trinity-bounces+windhorse=jeffnet.org at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+windhorse=jeffnet.org at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of FISH1IFR at aol.com Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2011 7:44 PM To: tstokely at att.net; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Times-Standard Opinion- Rick Dowd, Resighini Rancheria Interesting?. However, though I have great respect for Chairman Dowd and the Resighini Rancheria residents, there are nonetheless a number of serious problems and outright errors with his analysis of the KBRA in this article below, including the following: No ?Terminations? of Any Non-Party Tribe?s Rights: While there are some strictly voluntary water right settlements mentioned in the KBRA only by the signatory Party Tribes to the KBRA, no non-Party like the Reshigini?s can be bound in any way by what is essentially just a long-term habitat restoration contract if they did not sign that contract. The so-called ?terminations? of the Resighinis rights they fear will just not happen ? it is a pure fiction. This fact is also made clear in the Klamath Basin Economic Restoration Act (S. 1851 and H.R. 3398) that will implement the deal. Here is a direct quote from that bill language: ?Sec. 106 (l). NONPARTY TRIBES OF THE KLAMATH BASIN UNAFFECTED ? Nothing in this Act or the Restoration Agreement amends, alters, or limits the authority of the federally recognized tribes of the Klamath Basin, other than the Party Tribes, to exercise any water rights the tribes hold or may be determined to hold.? While it is true that the federal government cannot sue other Tribes in the basin over the KBRA on behalf of other non-Party Tribes, being the Trustees for them all, and cannot in essence ?sue itself? to overturn the KBRA when the federal government is itself going to be a Party, and so has to do what is called ?recusing? itself from participating in any such lawsuit, this is a far cry from any sort of rights ?termination.? Nothing prevents the Resighini Rancheria from hiring their own lawyers to enforce those rights if they want to ? this is done all the time, whenever a Tribe sues the federal government, since the feds cannot both represent themselves and simultaneously act as a Trustee for the suing Tribe against themselves in Court. KBRA Provisions are Misstated: Several statements made in this article about what the KBRA actually does are simply wrong. The 330,000 acre-feet the Klamath Irrigation Project will have to live within in the future is a ?ceiling,? not a ?floor? or minimum; while there is some money in the KBRA budget to help partially finance a renewable energy project in the upper basin, this is nowhere near the amount stated, nor is most of this money a ?subsidy? any more than any other type of federal energy development funding; and the refuge leaselands system was created and has been allowed continuously by Congressional statute (the Kuchel Act, P.L. 88-567 (U.S.C. 695n)) since 1964, nearly 46 years before the KBRA existed, nor will the KBRA have anything to do with whether or how long that program remains ? only a separate Act of Congress could change that prior statute. There are also other such errors I need not go into here. These errors are the result of simplistic "sound bite" criticisms and not any real analysis. Correcting Upper Basin Water Quality Problems are Separately Being Addressed Under the Clean Water Act: There are numerous well-known water quality problems in the upper Klamath Basin, but the KBRA ? which is really just a long-term restoration contract, remember ? is not the appropriate tool to address those problems. These problems are all already being addressed separately under the Clean Water Act and equivalent state water quality protection laws, including recently legally approved pollution control standards (TMDLs) in the upper basin intended to solve these water quality problems over time. Blaming the KBRA for NOT being the Clean Water Act is preposterous. What the KBRA would do, however, is bring something like $75 million additional dollars over the next 15 years to fully fund these already ongoing upper basin TMDL and state cleanup programs, jump-starting the implementation of these solutions by at least a decade. The Likely Outcome of Returning to the FERC Process May Not Be Four Dam Removal: Opponents of the Klamath Settlement Agreements have a touching faith in the willingness of state water agencies in both states (remember, one of the dams is in Oregon) to go directly against ? and win in every court and every appeal, on every key issue ? against the entire litigation might of the Hydropower Industry, which would surely see a first-time ever actual 401 certification denial in the Klamath as a major precedent to be fought at all costs. Those of us who are Parties to the Settlement simply have much less faith in that process and want to see the dams come down sooner and with far more certainty. Opponents of the Klamath Settlement should remember that the odds are strongly stacked against dam removals resulting from the FERC and State 401 Certification process. Not only has FERC never yet ordered a dam down against the wishes of a relicensing Applicant in its entire history, no STATE water quality agency has ever ?just said no? outright to a water quality certification application attached to a FERC license application and made it stick in court. Setting such a precedent would guarantee many years of litigation and expense, with appeals in all the state and federal courts for many years, with no certain outcome ? except that the dams would continue to run just as they are now, on annual license extensions, for as long as that litigation could be strung out (10-15 years at least are the best estimates from litigation counsel familiar with this process). PacifiCorp also has VERY deep pockets to fund litigation ? all their litigation costs are considered routine costs of doing business that are fully funded by its ratepayers. During all that time of ongoing litigation, without the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) there would also be NO ?interim measures? such as those required by the current KHSA to protect the fish in the meantime (with the exception of those few measures required under the PacifiCorp HCP, if any -- but all the other KHSA ?interim measures? would disappear with the KHSA). One possible ? potentially likely ? outcome of such an extended court fight from reversion to the FERC process would be that PacifiCorp would ultimately retain at least the J.C. Boyle Dam in Oregon. Because this dam IS in Oregon, the clean water laws that apply to it are much weaker than in California, the Oregon Water Quality Commission is much less willing to ?go to the mat? on this issue and get sued, the J.C. Boyle dam is by far the most valuable of the four dams for power production since it produces by far the most power (80 MW capacity), the water quality problems it creates are the least difficult to clean up, and furthermore it is likely the least costly of the dams to retrofit to modern FERC standards for relicensing. Losing the KBRA also means: losing up to 130,000 acre-feet of additional water in the Klamath River every year as compared to the current status quo; losing all benefits of a guaranteed water supply for the upper basin National Wildlife Refuges, letting them go dry in many years as they do today; losing the Klamath Tribes their only opportunity to reclaim the Mazama Forest as once again Tribal lands; losing most of the more than 100,000 acre-feet of additional wetlands restoration and natural storage under Sec. 18 of the KBRA, which will also benefit fish; losing the Klamath Project ?irrigation cap,? the first time the Klamath Irrigation Project has ever been legally limited in the water it can take for irrigation and; losing some $75 million in water quality monitoring and clean-up funds to implement the upper basin TMDLs much faster than would otherwise be the case, and; losing all the benefits of a 50-year aggressive watershed and salmon habitat restoration program in the Klamath Basin. Just taking the dams down, most biologists agree, will simply NOT be enough to truly revive the basin?s salmon runs. The water reforms and multiple watershed restoration benefits of the KBRA will also be necessary. In Summary: Settlement opponents should be VERY careful what they wish for if they are thinking about jettisoning the current Klamath Settlement and the high degree of certainty of four-dam removal plus major watershed improvements and water reforms it provides for. The chances of accomplishing four-dam removal, plus all the many restoration efforts the KBRA also provides, plus major water reforms to reverse years of water over-appropriation the KBRA also provides for, plus multiple other benefit of the KBRA, would all likely be MUCH worse (or zilch) under a FERC-only recourse. Under the FERC-only approach, you might well still get the dams down -- in 15 or 20 years -- but not accomplish lasting salmon restoration. Anyone who has more questions on the above, or on the KBRA-KHSA Settlement Agreement generally, should feel free to contact me PERSONALLY. I would be glad to discuss or debate these issues in a more appropriate forum. I am always hesitant to inflict such discussion on open forms such as this one. I hope those who are simply not interested in this issue will forgive me the intrusion. (smiling) ============================================= Glen H. Spain, NW Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 O:(541)689-2000 -- Fax:(541)689-2500 Email: fish1ifr at aol.com Home Page: www.pcffa.org In a message dated 11/19/2011 3:07:26 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, tstokely at att.net writes: Klamath Dam removal linked to very bad restoration agreement Rick Dowd/For the Times-Standard Posted: 11/18/2011 02:39:14 AM PST http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_19364130 Members of the Resighini Rancheria strongly object to the approach taken by the federal government and the state of California for Klamath River dam removal. We are a small, federally recognized Indian Tribe with a reservation in Del Norte County upstream of Highway 101 on the Klamath River. We have been studying the Klamath Hydroelectric Project Facilities Removal Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for several months and want to inform the community about major problems we have discovered. Comments on the DEIS/DEIR are due Monday. The DEIR/DEIS leads up to a secretary of Interior decision in March 2012 which, if affirmative, will not only carry out the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) that removes dams but also the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA). The KBRA is very damaging to Indian rights and will not bring about restoration of the Klamath River. We were excluded from Klamath settlement discussions that lead to the KBRA and KHSA, as were the federally recognized Quartz Valley Indian Reservation and Del Norte County. The Hoopa Valley Tribe participated in the settlement talks but refused to sign the KBRA because they would have to expressly give up their water and fishing rights. Both our rights, and theirs, to protect our fisheries and water quality will be terminated by the secretary of Interior if he makes an affirmative decision (KBRA 15.3.9). Those who are not KBRA and KHSA _____ Advertisement _____ signatories (parties), such as nonnparty tribes and Del Norte County, will be unable to participate in committees that govern the management of the Klamath River until 2062. This arrangement is undemocratic and of questionable legality under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Despite the fact that an affirmative secretarial decision will implement the KBRA, the environmental report does not examine the cumulative effects of its water allocation, stream flow projections and water pollution impacts. The DEIS/DEIR claims that the KBRA is insufficiently defined to analyze its effects, which is untrue. Among other things, it allocates a minimum of 330,000 acre feet of water to Klamath Project irrigators, subsidizes their power costs with $92 million in tax dollars, and allows farming on 20,000 acres in Tule Lake and Lower Klamath National Wildlife refuges for 50 years. The DEIS/DEIR failure to analyze cumulative effects from the KBRA and operation of the Klamath Project is a patent violation of both National Environmental Policy Act and the California Environmental Quality Act. The Chinook Expert Panel hired as part of the KBRA process noted that the KBRA had no credible plan to resolve water pollution problems. The experts stated that the Keno Reservoir reach of the Klamath River would continue to be an anoxic dead zone for weeks a year and that salmon wouldn't jump through it even after dam removal: ?Without solving the water quality problems, a fully self-sustaining run of chinook salmon to the upper basin is unlikely.? The Resighini Rancheria and Hoopa Valley Tribe both favor speedy Klamath Hydroelectric Power dam decommissioning but oppose the current approach that is joined to implementation of the KBRA. If the government had not discarded Alternative 8 from consideration, which is KHP facilities removal without the KBRA, then the Resighini Rancheria would have favored that option. Instead we will comment in favor of the no action alternative, with a return to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing process. The proponents of the KBRA say that FERC has never ordered a dam removed and that dam removal can come only with the KBRA, their flawed Settlement Agreement. FERC may not require dam removal, but its relicensing process can set up conditions that make project operation uneconomic. An example is the Condit Dam, on the White Salmon River in Washington, which was abandoned by PacifiCorp and decommissioned on Oct. 26 of this year. Unlike the KBRA, the related Settlement Agreement would have no negative impact on existing tribal water and fishing rights. The National Marine Fisheries Service requirement for installation of $230 million fish ladders, if KHP dams remain, cause the KHP to fall into uneconomic status. Furthermore, the California State Water Resources Control Board will not issue 401 Certification as required by the Clean Water Act and Federal Power Act; therefore, PacifiCorp will not receive a new license and will have to abandon and decommission. Comments can be submitted electronically at http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR/feedback. For more information on the DEIS/DEIR, Klamath River ecological restoration and the newly introduced authorizing legislation that we oppose, see our website: www.klamather.org. Rick Dowd is Resighini Rancheria chairman. = -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 21 10:20:59 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:20:59 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mailtribune opinion- A dam bit of difference: the Klamath debate Message-ID: <474D0563-CF84-44CB-A3B0-3F6ED650630B@att.net> A dam bit of difference: the Klamath debate http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20111120/OPINION/111200317/-1/NEWSMAP By Bill Cross Not all dams are created equal. Each is endowed by its creators with certain abilities: Some provide flood control, some store irrigation water, some generate hydroelectricity, and many ? like the one at Lost Creek Reservoir on the Rogue River ? are engineering compromises that do a bit of all these things. If we're going to debate whether to remove a dam, we need to know precisely what it does. Right now the nation's hottest dam-removal debate centers on whether to dismantle four PacifiCorp dams on the Upper Klamath River. Yet many people don't understand what these dams can ? and cannot ? do. The fact that the dams are owned by PacifiCorp, an electric power company, should be a big clue. PacifiCorp is not in the business of providing flood control or storing irrigation water for farmers. PacifiCorp generates and sells electricity, and making electricity is the only thing their Upper Klamath dams were designed to do. This surprises most people. They assume that all dams reduce flooding in winter and boost the river's flow during the long dry summer. But to do those things, a dam must be able to store and release large amounts of water by raising and lowering the reservoir behind the dam. At Lost Creek Reservoir on the Rogue, the Army Corps of Engineers releases extra water every summer, lowering the reservoir dramatically, then uses that excess space to capture high flows during winter and spring, refilling the reservoir in time for the next summer dry season. Not so with PacifiCorp's Klamath dams. Seasonal raising and lowering is inefficient for generating hydropower, and PacifiCorp knows a thing or two about efficiency. The Upper Klamath reservoirs were designed to maintain a near-constant level, with no ability to store excess water in one season for release at a later time. These dams are what engineers call "run of river" facilities, designed to release essentially the same amount of water that flows into the reservoir. They can alter flows only very briefly ? on a 24-hour cycle in the case of J.C. Boyle and Copco dams ? storing up the river's flow overnight in order to release it in an oversized pulse the following day. This allows PacifiCorp to produce power when demand is highest in the middle of the day. But the dams simply cannot store enough water to reduce winter floods or release extra water in the summer. Let's look at the numbers. Lost Creek can be raised and lowered by 121 feet every year, allowing it to store ? or release ? 315,000 acre-feet of water. That's enough to cover an area the size of Medford in 23 feet of water. Iron Gate Reservoir, the biggest of the four PacifiCorp reservoirs, can be raised or lowered by a mere 4 feet, allowing it to store only 3,790 acre-feet ? enough to cover Medford in just over three inches of water. So although the Rogue and Klamath are similar sized rivers, Lost Creek can store 80 times as much water. Iron Gate can store just over a day's worth of the Klamath's average flow, while Lost Creek can store a whopping 84 days' worth of the Rogue's average. That's the difference between a single-purpose hydro dam like Iron Gate, and a multi-purpose dam like Lost Creek. But these numbers are all theoretical anyway, because the PacifiCorp dams never have been, and never will be, operated for flood control or water storage. PacifiCorp isn't required to do those things and, given the dams' design, it couldn't if it wanted to. The only dam on the Klamath that provides flood control and water storage is Link River Dam, located far upstream at the outlet of Upper Klamath Lake. That dam is run by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation ? not PacifiCorp ? and no one is suggesting that it be removed. So let's be clear, and let's be fair: The only thing the PacifiCorp dams were designed to do is generate electricity, and that's all they will ever do. What we should be debating, then, is whether the merits of power production outweigh the environmental costs of keeping these dams in place. That's a fair question to debate. The organization I represent, American Whitewater, believes the modest amount of electricity these dams produce (about 1/400th of California's total demand) pales when compared with the tremendous harm they cause by blocking migrating fish, brewing toxic algae and flooding or dewatering almost two dozen miles of one of the West's greatest recreational rivers. Bill Cross is regional coordinator for American Whitewater. He teaches whitewater canoeing and rafting on the Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Nov 22 08:51:22 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 08:51:22 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update week of November 14 to 18, 2011 Message-ID: Happy Thanksgiving all! The latest mid-season update from our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey is available here http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries We mapped 770 mainstem Trinity redds last week! Spawning activity in the lower river (Downstream of Hawkins Bar) is really starting to pick up. See you on the river! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Nov 22 16:32:52 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 16:32:52 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Union Democrat- Water districts accuse feds of killing salmon Message-ID: Gee, it's a good thing this isn't happening on the Trinity River to spring Chinook (petitioned for listing), or is it? Tom Stokely Water districts accuse feds of killing salmon on Stan Written by Ryan Campbell, The Union Democrat November 18, 2011 01:09 pm http://www.uniondemocrat.com/20111118105379/News/Local-News/Water-districts-accuse-feds-of-killing-salmon-on-Stan?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UnionDemocrat+%28The+Union+Democrat%2C+Sonora%2C+CA+News%2C+Sports%2C+%26+Weather%252 Fnger-pointing has begun in earnest following the destruction of dozens of Chinook salmon spawning grounds in the Stanislaus River this month. Area irrigation districts are claiming that federal water regulators failed to properly manage the flow of water down the Stanislaus River over the past several months, causing about 23 spawning zones to be left high and dry after salmon deposited their eggs. Federal employees, meanwhile, said they released more water than usual from New Melones Reservoir because they needed to make room for future rainfall following record precipitation levels last year. The fish kerfuffle began after the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which operates New Melones Reservoir, began releasing more than 2,000 cubic feet of water per second into the Stanislaus River. The flow was well above the seasonal average of 500 cubic feet per second due to unusually high rainfall last year. The greater volume of water drove breeding salmon populations further into spawning channels than usual, according to biologist Doug Demko with the Oakdale-based firm FISHBIO, which conducts studies of several San Joaquin Valley irrigation districts. When the Bureau of Reclamation reduced the flow to more normal levels on Nov. 2, several breeding channels were drained, leaving spawning zones or ?redds? to dry out or become stagnant, he said. ?Salmon are very particular. They need a lot of flow for their nests,? he said. Demko said the move was essentially a mistake that could have been avoided if the bureau had contacted FISHBIO or one of the three major irrigation districts that draw water from the lower Stanislaus River ? the Oakdale and South San Joaquin irrigation districts and the Stockton East Water District. The areas primarily affected are between Knights Ferry and Orange Blossom Bridge. Some of the areas that went dry were restoration sites the government spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to make suitable for salmon redds, Demko said. He said about 23 redds were destroyed outright while another 13 were damaged, amounting to the loss of roughly 10 percent of the entire breeding population of Chinook salmon, which is classified by the federal government as a ?species of concern.? He said as many as 200,000 eggs could have been lost due to the flow variations, potentially impacting future salmon runs up the Stanislaus River. ?It doesn?t matter if flows are increased now, those eggs are dead,? he said. But higher-than-average water levels left the federal agency no choice but to release ?pulse? flows from New Melones Reservoir, according to Louis Moore, spokesman for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. ?We were making adjustments to make sure safe space was maintained in the reservoir,? he said. ?We need to make sure we have enough space in the reservoir to make room for storm systems that might come in.? He said it is not unusual for salmon spawning grounds to be damaged during high-flow years, but that the bureau was able to achieve the ?best case scenario for all the demands involved.? New Melones Reservoir now stands at roughly 81 percent capacity with 1.95 million acre-feet of water in storage. ?It?s always a balancing act to maintain water storage at the reservoir,? Moore said. Valley water authorities, meanwhile, were calling for more communication with state and federal water policymakers ? as well as a position on the Stanislaus Operating Group, which helps decide how much water should flow down the river. ?Because we hold the first water rights to the Stanislaus River, we think we deserve the right to sit on that committee,? said Jeff Shields, general manager of the South San Joaquin Irrigation District. He said state and federal water agencies have ignored much of the research and expertise local water agencies have offered. ?We should have been releasing a lot more water throughout the year,? said Kevin Kauffman, general manager of the Stockton East Water District. Steve Knell, general manager of the Oakdale Irrigation District, said the bureau should have either maintained higher water levels throughout the salmon nesting season, or kept the water level low. ?They ran the river high and encouraged (the salmon) to go into the back channels, and then they cut the water level,? he said. ?We ended up with this unfortunate loss of salmon.? He said the Bureau of Reclamation should listen to the concerns of local agencies because they have more expertise in specific river systems. ?The irrigation districts know more about the river than the state and federal government, but when it comes to decision time we don?t have a seat at the table,? he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Nov 27 07:56:27 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 07:56:27 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Wally Herger: Where I stand on the Klamath Dams Message-ID: Wally Herger: Where I stand on the Klamath dams Posted November 27, 2011 at midnight http://www.redding.com/news/2011/nov/27/wally-herger-where-i-stand-on-the-klamath-dams/?partner=RSS I have always been ? and continue to be ? a fervent supporter of dams. I believe we need more dams, not fewer. They are invaluable because of their many benefits, including as a source of abundant and cheap electricity, protection from flooding, and recreational opportunities (including the economic benefits they create) for local communities. Unfortunately, decades of increasing environmental regulation have created skyrocketing costs and potential liabilities for existing dam owners. It's a problem we are seeing play out across the West and indeed right here in our own backyard as four dams on the Klamath River are currently being considered for removal because the environmental costs and risks of continued operation have become so high. The debate over these four Klamath River dams has become a big issue in our area. Constituents I have known and worked with for many years are sharply divided on it. Farmers in Tulelake in Siskiyou County have been fighting regulatory battles like these for years. Indeed, in 2001 their area was ground zero for a national battle over the inflexible Endangered Species Act (ESA), as farmers there had all of their irrigation water abruptly shut off in a decision that was later determined to be not justified by science. It is these same farmers who have been working to take the best advantage of a settlement agreement that they fervently hope will provide them the regulatory certainty they need to survive. They are hardly cheerleaders for dam removal. But they have concluded that giving up certain dams that create hydropower but do not store agricultural water is a trade-off they are willing to make in exchange for what they hope will stop the endless regulatory and court battles over their water supplies. If I were in their position, I would be advocating for the same settlement agreement to have a more secure economic future. There is a wider community sentiment that strongly opposes dam removal. This was reflected in a lopsided but legally nonbinding referendum. This emotionally charged issue is further complicated by the fact that, at its core, dam removal in this case involves a private property right. PacifiCorp, the owner of the dams, has reluctantly made a tentative business decision to remove its dams. The company indicated to me that it did not reach this decision lightly. But, to be blunt, the company had a regulatory gun pointed at its head. It is not that the dams are structurally deficient; the problem is that they cannot meet current state and federal laws and regulations. As PacifiCorp moved through the relicensing process, it realized it would be required to spend hundreds of millions of dollars for fish ladders and other mitigation, and yet it was still unclear whether it would receive a vital permit required under the Clean Water Act. Faced with this prospect, PacifiCorp decided to cut its losses. (The negotiated settlement allows the company to cap its costs at $200 million. Seeking to relicense the dams would far more than double that cost, which, under current law, would be passed on to ratepayers.) That said, dam removal is by no means a "done deal." The "Agreement in Principle" requires a $250 million contribution from the state of California. Given the acute fiscal crisis facing California, such funding is by no means assured. Furthermore, the Klamath River Expert Panel (a scientific "peer review" panel convened by the Department of Interior) recently concluded that current studies are deficient in addressing a host of subjects. A June story in the Los Angeles Times was headlined: "Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam removal plan." The opening sentence bluntly noted, "A $1.4 billion project to remove four hydroelectric dams and restore habitat to return Chinook salmon to the upper reaches of the Klamath River amounts to an experiment with no guarantee of success, an independent science review has concluded." Bear in mind that the Department of Interior asked for this review. I contacted Interior Secretary Ken Salazar in late August and asked him to respond to the Expert Panel's scathing criticisms, but I have still received no reply. Before the secretary renders a decision on dam removal, and before the Congress is asked to expend roughly a billion dollars to implement a "restoration" program, it might be a good idea to make sure that the plan will not be a colossal failure. If the science does not justify the proposal to remove the dams, or if the cost/benefit ratio is so out of kilter that it does not pass the straight-face test, then PacifiCorp should be owed the opportunity to seek a new license that contains reasonable and affordable conditions. But the bottom line is we must continue working to reform the environmental laws that are making life so difficult and costly for farmers and energy producers alike. Rep. Wally Herger, R-Chico, represents California's 2nd Congressional District. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 28 12:47:50 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 12:47:50 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Guides and C-WIN Request Moratorium on Trinity River Channel Projects References: Message-ID: <17B98033-395C-4E59-BA18-C9B4C517EC55@att.net> http://www.c-win.org/content/trinity-river-press-room-c-win-and-trinity-guides-ask-moratorium-trinity-river-mainstem-proj www.c-win.org www.trinityriverguidesassociation.com 808 Romero Canyon Road P.O. Box 327 Santa Barbara, CA 93108 Douglas City, CA 96024 Press Release For Immediate Release, November 28, 2011 Contact: Tom Stokely, C-WIN: 530-524-0315 Bill Dickens, Trinity River Guides Association: 530-623-1905 Fishing Guides, & Conservationists Ask for Moratorium on Trinity River Channel Projects Douglas City, Calif.? Today the Trinity River Guides Association and the California Water Impact Network asked the Trinity River Restoration Program to take a break to determine if river restoration projects completed to date have met their objectives or had unintended impacts. The letter states that there is public concern about significant filling of pool habitat for adult salmon and steelhead from excessive gravel introduction into the river channel as well as numerous side channel failures. Bill Dickens of the Guides Association said, ?There is no choice but to oppose this type of project until an evaluation of the existing projects is complete. We are just asking the Restoration Program to do what is already required as part of the Trinity River Record of Decision.? The Record of Decision was signed by former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt and former Hoopa Valley Tribe Chairman Duane Sherman in Hoopa on December 19, 2000. Tom Stokely with C-WIN said ?The Interior Department and the Trinity River Restoration Program are not responsive to public concerns. The Guides Association wrote a letter on March 14, 2011 that has still not received a response. It?s inexcusable.? C-WIN is the successor organization to Friends of Trinity River that closed earlier this year after the passing of Friends founder Byron Leydecker. Dickens said ?As fishing guides, we fully support restoration of the river?s fisheries, but we?re not convinced that they are doing it the right way. It?s time to take a break and look at what?s been done before tens of millions of additional taxpayer dollars are spent.? Stokely added ?C-WIN and the Guides Association have long been supporters of the goals of the Trinity River Restoration Program, but the Program has ignored the stakeholders for too long and we have no choice but to speak up before more money is wasted on failed projects.? A copy of the letter can be found at: http://c-win.org/webfm_send/199 # # # For more information on C-WIN and the Trinity River, see http://www.c-win.org/meet-trinity-river.html. The California Water Impact Network promotes the equitable and environmental use of California's water, including instream uses, through research, planning, public education, and litigation. www.c-win.org The Trinity River Guides Association represents licensed and permitted professional sport fishing guides on the Trinity and Lower Klamath River and is dedicated to the protection and preservation of the Trinity River and its habitat. http://www.trinityriverguidesassociation.com/ ? www.c-win.org www.trinityriverguidesassociation.com 808 Romero Canyon Road P.O. Box 327 Santa Barbara, CA 93108 Douglas City, CA 96024 November 28, 2011 Robin Schock, Executive Director Brian Person, Chairman Trinity River Restoration Program Trinity Management Council P.O. Box 1300 16349 Shasta Dam Boulevard Weaverville, CA 96093 Shasta Lake CA 96019 Subject: Objection to New Trinity River Mainstem Projects Prior to Completion of Phase One Review Dear Ms. Schock and Mr. Person: We write again to restate that we recommend a moratorium on Trinity River mainstem restoration projects until an independent Phase 1 review has been completed per direction contained in the Implementation Plan for Trinity River Record of Decision.[1] The TRGA intended that the letter dated March 14, 2011 (copy enclosed) be brought before the TMC for consideration and a written response. At that time we were advised that the appropriate protocol was to address our concerns to TAMWG so that TAMWG could forward to the TMC our letter together with its own recommendations on the subjects covered by our letter. That seemed logical at the time. However, we have recently been informed that some interests may take the odd position that TMC does not owe us a written response because our letter happened to be addressed to TAMWG with cc to TMC, rather than the other way around. We believe that TMC should directly respond to the points of concern in our March 14 letter. TRGA is not only a stakeholder in the process, but represents more hours of observation on the affected river reaches than all other stakeholders combined. It is our understanding that a Phase 1 review is being completed, but that Phase 2 mainstem projects are already being designed for implementation beginning in 2012, prior to the completion of the Phase 1 review. We vigorously object to both the design and construction of additional mainstem projects in 2012 prior to completion of the Phase 1 review. We also write to provide you with our recommendations regarding the Phase 1 review. We will not reiterate the objections contained in our March letters, but our observations of the Trinity River as a result of this year?s historic 11,000 cfs fishery flow strengthens our objections to additional ill-designed mainstem ?restoration? projects until the Phase 1 review has been completed. Numerous side channels constructed in the Trinity River prior to and since the 2000 Trinity Record of Decision (Trinity ROD) have completely failed[2]. The 80,000 tons of spawning gravel placed in the river near Lewiston over the past few years have continued to overwhelm approximately twenty significant adult fish holding/staging pools in the river upstream of Douglas City[3], with no scouring of additional pools to replace them. We object to public statements made by TRRP staff that the Guides have observed formation of significant new pools from the high flows. There have been significant negative environmental consequences of the TRRP?s actions that have not been adequately analyzed in your programmatic or site-specific environmental documents and we can no longer idly stand by. Our observation is that the 11,000 cfs flow was able to mobilize existing gravels to a much greater extent than previous high flows and it clearly negates the need to inject any additional spawning gravel. This should be evaluated in the Phase 1 review prior to implementation of new projects with gravel injection. We understand that a pool depth survey is being completed by a consultant, which we support. We recommend that the results of the pool depth survey be incorporated into the Phase 1 review to determine if the reduction in pool volumes and depths for adult fish may now be the limiting factor for salmon in the Trinity River instead of juvenile rearing habitat. Is the lack of pools causing crowding, increased predation and disease of fish at Lewiston Dam? We also request that the Phase 1 review determine how the mainstem ?restoration? projects will affect Coho and steelhead production? Since Coho and steelhead largely spawn and rear in tributaries, does the mainstem work that impacts adult steelhead and Coho staging areas adversely impact their success in getting to tributary spawning grounds in good condition? We also recommend that the Phase 1 review consider the fact that huge volumes of spawning gravel already exist within the mainstem channel from tributaries and years of inadequate flows, thereby negating the need to inject additional gravels in the river to create habitat. The huge volumes of spawning gravel present in the river became apparent following the high flow this year. We request that upon issuance of the draft Phase 1 Report, but prior to completion of the final Report, a public hearing be held by your Science Advisory Board to present the draft findings of the consultants to accept public testimony and respond to questions on the report. Failure to incorporate an open public process would be indicative to us that the Phase 1 Report is not independent science, but instead a foregone conclusion and justification to continue with the failed restoration policies of the past. The failure of so many side channels constructed by the Trinity River Restoration Program in recent years casts significant doubt on the professional judgment of the mainstem project Design Team. Our conversations with various Design Team members indicates that after a decade of project designs, there is hardly consensus or unanimity about the appropriate course of action for future mainstem projects and nobody is accepting responsibility for obvious failures. We also find that relations between various agency and tribal members are poor with a great deal of mistrust and personal animosity, which has been documented in reports by independent consultants and program participants. This does not reflect well upon the Trinity River Restoration Program?s so-called ?Adaptive Management? approach and ?interagency cooperation.? It points to a need for significant change in the management structure of the TRRP that is the subject of other correspondence. Despite the clear failures related to side channels and pool filling, the TRRP?s determination to proceed with additional projects in 2012 prior to completion of the Phase 1 review shows an abject disregard for the public that is increasingly concerned about the TRRP?s actions. We strongly support restoration of the Trinity River, but the observations of our fishing guides formed by many thousands of hours on the river over a period of many years conflicts greatly with the ?science? behind the TRRP. We believe that completion of the Phase 1 review prior to design and implementation of new projects is the prudent thing to do and is required as part of the Record of Decision. We strongly object to both the design and construction of additional mainstem projects prior to completion of the Phase 1 review. Design and completion of new projects prior to the Phase 1 Review is a waste of tax dollars and cannot be justified. The TRRP continues to ignore public opinion and we find ourselves in the position of having no other option but to ask Congress and the Administration to eliminate funding for these mainstem projects until there is a truly independent scientific review of your actions. Absent a change of policy direction by the TRRP, we have no choice but to do everything we can to ensure that the TRRP does no further harm to the Trinity River and its fisheries. We intend to dissect your environmental documents and vigorously oppose the issuance of permits for additional mainstem projects until such time as the Phase 1 Review is complete and the public is given a real voice in the direction of the Trinity River Restoration Program. Meanwhile, we are committed to educate the public that many of the mainstem projects are an abject failure and should not proceed as planned until completion of a review as required by the Trinity ROD. We look forward to the TMC?s written response. If you have any questions or comments about this letter, please feel free to contact any of us. Sincerely, Bill Dickens, President Tom Stokely Trinity River Guides Association California Water Impact Network webefshn at com-pair.net Tom.Stokely at c-win.org 530-623-1905 530-524-0315 Carolee Krieger Liam Gogan Board President and Executive Director Past President California Water Impact Network Trinity River Guides Association caroleekrieger at cox.net kristagogan at hughes.net 805-969-0824 530-623-6224 Michael Caranci Travis Michel michael at theflyshop.com sweettrinity at live.com 530-222-3555 530-623-4695 Ed Duggan Steven Townzen yen2fish at netzero.com steve at trinityfishing.net 530-629-3554 530-623-2112 Paul Catanese Scott Stratton pcatanese at dhscott.com scott at trinityriveradventures.com 916-623-2328 530-623-4179 Bob Norman bnorman at sonic.net 530-778-3540 Enclosure: March 14, 2011 TRGA Letter cc: Senator Dianne Feinstein Senator Barbara Boxer Congressman Wally Herger Congressman Mike Thompson Congressman George Miller Trinity Management Council Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group Katherine Kuhlman, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Interested Parties [1] Page C-8, Appendix C, Final EIS/EIR for Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration, http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reports/technical/treis/final/appndx_c.pdf [2] Recent side channel failures include but are not limited to Lowden Ranch, Teepee Burner, Sven Olbertson, Lower Salt Flat, Douglas City BLM Campground and Reading Creek. [3] Pools alleged to have been damaged by Trinity Guide members include but are not limiting to the following pools: "Fly Only " waters Tapering Glides and Bend Pool, Diversion Pool, New Bridge Pool, Pyramid Rock Pool Behind TR Trailer Park (1/4 mile) below new bridge, Glide Pool above Old Bridge, Old Bridge Pool, Peterson's Pool (1/8 mile below Old bridge), Teepee Burner Pool, Top end of Rush Creek Pool, Salt Flat Pool, Webbers Pool, Browns Alley Pool (1/4 Mile above Bucktail), Holey Water Pool(1/8mile above Bucktail), Graveyard Pool (above Bucktail Bridge), Johnnies Pool (1/8 mile below Bucktail Br.), Perries Pool (Across Lowden Meadow), Ponderosa Pines Pool, Moon Lim Lee Pool (above Poker Bar), Slough Pool (above Poker Bar) and the Reading Creek Pool. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Nov 29 10:48:28 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 10:48:28 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update week of November 21 to 23, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all! The latest mid-season update from our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey is available here: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries A combination of Thanksgiving Holiday and stormy/turbid conditions limited our survey to reaches 1,2 ,6, 7, and 9 last week. Even so, we mapped 353 mainstem Trinity River salmon redds. Talk to you soon, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Wed Nov 30 11:19:21 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 11:19:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Ex-judge who ruled for Westlands is now its lawyer Message-ID: <4ED681B9.3000700@tcrcd.net> sacbee.com This story is taken from Sacbee / Our Region / Courts/Legal News Ex-judge who ruled for Westlands is now its lawyer mweiser at sacbee.com Published Wednesday, Nov. 30, 2011 A retired federal judge who recently ruled in favor of California's largest agricultural water agency is now an attorney for that agency in a different lawsuit. Judge Oliver Wanger, who retired Sept. 30 from the federal district court in Fresno, recently was named in a court filing as an attorney for Westlands Water District. The district delivers water to farms in the San Joaquin Valley, most of it diverted from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Just weeks before retirement, Wanger ruled in favor of Westlands in a case the district brought against federal regulation of water diversions from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The rules are meant to protect the Delta smelt, a threatened fish. In an outburst from the bench in that case on Sept. 19, he accused two federal scientists of bias, calling one a "zealot" and suggesting the other distorted the truth. It was a rare emotional moment for Wanger, who for two decades has ruled for both water users and environmental groups in numerous complex water cases. On retirement, Wanger became headline partner at a Fresno law firm that previously saw relatively little work in the water arena. Wanger said he sees no conflict in taking the Westlands case. "I would not undertake any representation where there is a conflict," he said. "Candidly, if the environmentalists had sought to hire me or the government had sought to hire me and I had no conflicts, I would have been happy to consider representing them." Wanger is also representing Fresno County in its effort to prevent Occupy Fresno protesters from camping in Courthouse Park. The new water case was filed in Fresno Superior Court in August by the North Coast Rivers Alliance, Friends of the River, Save the American River Association and the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. They allege that Westlands and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation harm water quality and wildlife by irrigating Westlands land, which transports naturally occurring selenium from the soil into waterways. Selenium can deform wildlife when it enters the food chain. It did so in spectacular fashion in 1983, when dozens of deformed birds were found at Kesterson Wildlife Refuge. The plaintiffs are asking the court to require Westlands and the bureau to obtain a state waste-discharge permit. "I guess I'm not surprised he's now basically retained by Westlands," said Steve Evans, program consultant at Friends of the River. "I'm sure Westlands is purchasing the best legal representation they can buy. But I trust the system to work, and I think we have a really good case." Ethics rules forbid a former judge from serving as a lawyer for a party in a case over which he recently presided. That does not necessarily apply in a different case, even with similar issues. It may depend on details that can become a subject of legal dispute. ? Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 30 11:24:08 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 11:24:08 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Walters- Oregon dam removal may cost California Message-ID: <54098E2F-BBB3-428B-8C18-6E17A73B6C50@att.net> Oregon dam removal may cost California http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/11/24/2626954/oregon-dam-removal-may-cost-california.html 3 Comments (go to the website above to see them- they are all interesting) Thursday, Nov. 24, 2011 | 09:42 PM The California Oregon Power Co. was founded in 1911 to supply electricity to the southernmost Oregon counties and the northernmost California counties. It built four hydroelectric power dams on the Klamath River. The Klamath cuts across California's northwestern corner and is incredibly remote. Until those dams were built, blocking spawning runs, it supported an immense salmon and steelhead fishery that sustained Indian tribes living along its banks. COPCO merged with Pacific Power and Light Co. in 1961. PP&L eventually changed its name to PacificCorp, and in 2005 was acquired by Warren Buffett. Those Klamath River dams have become very contentious factors in a controversy over how the river's waters should be managed, involving not only their effect on fish, but the water supplies of farmers in the Klamath Basin, the southern Oregon region where the river begins. While Indian tribes and commercial fishermen demand elimination of the dams to restore fish runs, farmers worry about irrigation water. The factions have worked out a deal to remove the four dams and restore fish habitat, while protecting water supplies for those farmers. California Rep. Mike Thompson, a Democrat who represents the North Coast, and Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkeley, have introduced legislation to implement it. However, a big sticking point is its cost, about a billion dollars. Thompson and Merkeley want the federal government to pay half, which already is drawing opposition in a Republican-controlled Congress. PacificCorp would pay about 25%. The remaining $250 million? The two legislators say it would come from "non-federal sources." They don't say that it would come from California taxpayers, specifically a $250 million chunk of the $11.1 billion state water bond that is scheduled to go before voters next year. And why should California taxpayers be on the hook? The dams' removal would have no effect, positive or negative, on our water supply. The semi-official rationale -- weak at best -- is that improving fish runs on the Klamath would offset losses of habitat in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. But the bottom line is that, with interest on the bonds, it's a half-billion-dollar gift from California taxpayers to Oregon farmers and Warren Buffett, because PacificCorp would otherwise have to pay for the dams' removal or attempt to get them relicensed, a virtual impossibility. Given the season, one could say that it's a real turkey. DAN WALTERS WRITES FOR THE BEE?S CAPITOL BUREAU. E-MAIL: DWALTERS at SACBEE.COM; MAIL: P.O. BOX 15779, SACRAMENTO, CA 95852. Read more: http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/11/24/2626954/oregon-dam-removal-may-cost-california.html#ixzz1fDatQebv -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 30 11:27:26 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 11:27:26 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- RIVER REVOLT Message-ID: <69D3DDE8-4D6E-4F2D-8A2F-3F4B83AB5AE4@att.net> RIVER REVOLT http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-11-30/Front_Page/RIVER_REVOLT.html Trinity River Guides, C-WIN seek project moratorium BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL The Trinity River Guide Association has again requested a moratorium on Trinity River mainstem restoration projects until an independent review of earlier projects is completed. This time, the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) has joined the guides in their request to the Trinity Management Council. The letter to Robin Schrock, executive director of the Trinity River Restoration Program, and Brian Person, chairman of the Trinity Management Council, notes that the review is directed in the implementation plan for the Trinity River Record of Decision. ?It is our understanding that a Phase 1 review is being completed, but that Phase 2 mainstem projects are already being designed for implementation beginning in 2012, prior to completion of the Phase 1 review,? the letter states. Guides say they have observed numerous side channels constructed on the river that have failed. ?The 80,000 tons of spawning gravel placed in the river near Lewiston over the past few years have continued to overwhelm approximately 20 significant adult fish holding/staging pools in the river upstream of Douglas City,? the guides say. They also request that the review determine how the mainstem projects will affect coho and steelhead production, since they largely spawn and rear in tributaries. They request a public hearing to present draft findings of consultants working on the review. ?The TRRP continues to ignore public opinion and we find ourselves in the position of having no other option but to ask Congress and the administration to eliminate funding for these mainstem projects until there is a truly scientific review of your actions,? the letter states. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Wed Nov 30 12:20:52 2011 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 12:20:52 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] State and feds announce release of Delta studies after massive complaints In-Reply-To: <4ED681B9.3000700@tcrcd.net> References: <4ED681B9.3000700@tcrcd.net> Message-ID: <7FF4B856-A562-4DA4-8E2D-0BED4F747AD7@fishsniffer.com> http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/11/30/state-and-feds- announce-expedited-access-to-delta-plan-documents/ http://www.fishsniffer.com/content/1530-state-feds-announce-release- delta-studies-after-massive-complaints.html State and feds announce release of Delta studies after massive complaints Laird and Hayes continue to fast-track peripheral canal plan by Dan Bacher The state and federal governments on November 29 announced they plan to release Delta science studies in response to the voluminous comments they received criticizing a controversial agreement that fast-tracks the construction of the peripheral canal under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). Tuesday's press release from the U.S. Department of Interior claimed that Interior, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the California Natural Resources Agency and the California Department of Water Resources "announced a first step in responding to public comments on a draft Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with California water agencies that will enhance transparency in developing the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) by speeding access to draft technical documents." "This initial step will be followed by additional responses to public comments that have been filed on the MOA," Interior noted. The "public comments" included letters from unprecedented 242 fishing, tribal and environmental organizations, 17 California Legislators and 11 Members of Congress, who slammed the top-down process that is dominated by corporate agribusiness and water agency interests that export water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. To read the entire Environmental Water Caucus letter, go to: http://www.ewccalifornia.org/reports/moaLetter11-16-11.pdf. The letter from the 242 groups stated, "The MOA was negotiated behind closed doors and only serves to reinforce the growing awareness that the BDCP is biased in favor of the export water contractor?s agenda to increase exports from the Delta and its connected rivers, despite the documented negative impacts those exports have had on endangered fish species, Delta habitats, water quality and public trust values." Both Deputy Secretary of the Interior David J. Hayes and Secretary of Natural Resources John Laird extolled the "virtues" of the plan to build the canal or tunnel to export more water to corporate agribusiness and southern California. ?The Bay Delta Conservation Plan may propose the largest habitat restoration project ever to be undertaken in the United States in the largest and most important estuary on the west coast of the Americas,? claimed Deputy Secretary of the Interior David J. Hayes. ?This needs to be done right, and that is why we are announcing our joint commitment that all parties have access to key documents involved in the development of the BDCP.? ?Our expectation is that broad stakeholder understanding of its scientific underpinnings will improve their engagement in both the plan and its implementation," said Secretary of Natural Resources John Laird. "Fish, farmers and the 25 million average Californians who rely on the San Francisco-San Joaquin Delta for water deserve nothing less." Laird continued: "One thing is absolutely clear as review of the comments on the MOA have begun -- no one wants even the appearance of a special advantage. Thus, while other comments on the MOA will be addressed in coming weeks, there is no need to wait on committing to release all documents to all parties at the same time." The "enhancement" will be finalized in a letter among the controlling agencies in December, according to Interior. The letter will spell out that key BDCP-related documents will be posted on the internet at http://www.BayDeltaConservationPlan.com and made available to all parties for review at the same time. A list of expected release dates will be posted on the website within the week. I am glad that Laird and Hayes have agreed to releasing all of the controversial BDCP documents "to all parties at the same time." However, I find Laird's comments greenwashing the peripheral canal plan, under the guise of a habitat conservation plan, disturbing. When he says, "Fish, farmers and the 25 million average Californians who rely on the San Francisco-San Joaquin Delta for water deserve nothing less," Laird echoes the false notion that the only "real stakeholders" regarding the future of the Delta are fish, "farmers" and urban water users, a concept that both the Delta Vision and BDCP fiascos have embodied. What about Delta residents, boaters, recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, California Indian Tribes, conservationists, environmental justice communities, business owners and all of those other people whose lives depend on the health of the Delta and its fish populations? Laird has to date done nothing to include them in the BDCP Management Committee because he apparently considers water exporters and political hacks to be the only "real" stakeholders. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla responded to Interior's release by stating, "The BDCP decides to start releasing science documents because they haven't been transparent. So now we are supposed to trust the science that they are selectively releasing - after we were not at the table to see how that 'science" was created. Judge Wanger, the Delta smelt judge who retired a few weeks ago, is now a lawyer for the Westlands Water District (Nothing like the growing nexus between corporations and the judiciary in this country.)" "Phil Isenberg, chair of the Delta Stewardship Council, is telling everyone that the contractors will settle for a 9000 cfs. pipe to grab Delta water, and (drumroll please), the BDCP, which doesn't have a project, released a job description for a project manager to build the tunnel. Qualifications are: he/she must have worked for one of the water contractor groups that wants to take the water," Barrigan- Parrilla noted. Laird and Gerald Meral, Deputy Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, have continued the abysmal environmental policies of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in pushing for the construction of a peripheral canal or tunnel through the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. However, Laird and Hayes have actually eclipsed the Schwarzenegger and Bush administrations in slaughtering Delta fish and Central Valley chinook salmon in the state and federal water project facilities in the South Delta. The Obama and Brown administrations, under the "leadership" of Laird and Hayes, have killed record numbers of Sacramento splittail and other fish in the pumps while exporting record amounts of water out of the Delta this year. Over 11 million fish, including 9 million Sacramento splittail, have been "salvaged" at the Delta pumps near Tracy in 2011. The previous record salvage number for the splittail, a native minnow found only in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River system, was 5.5 million in 2006. The other 2 million fish "salvaged" at the pumps include striped bass, largemouth bass, Sacramento River spring chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead and other species. Yet the numbers salvaged are just a fraction of the actual loss of fish in the pumps; scientific studies point to the real loss being 5 to 10 times the "salvage" numbers. (http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/09/09/ over-11-million-fish-salvaged-in-delta-death-pumps-since-january-1). The state and federal water projects pumped a record 6.5 million acre- feet of water from the Delta in 2011. The previous record, set during the Schwarzenegger and Bush administrations, was 6.3 million acre- feet in 2005. The peripheral canal or tunnel that Laird and Hayes are pushing will only result in the extinction of protected Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail and green sturgeon because this "improved conveyance" will inevitably result in increased water exports from an estuary that has been ravaged by the current diversions. The BDCP is in reality a "Bad Delta Canal Plan," not a "Bay Delta Conservation Plan." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Wed Nov 30 13:35:50 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:35:50 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Community Meeting in Junction City December 7 to share observations, impressions of restoration efforts Message-ID: <4ED6A1B6.30600@tcrcd.net> * Trinity River Community Conversation* Wednesday, December 7th 6:00 - 7:30 pm - North Fork Grange Hall, Junction City Dutch Creek Road / Hwy 299 Join other Trinity River community members to discuss your impressions of the current river restoration efforts and share your observations about the Trinity River. Hosted by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District (530) 623 - 6004 www.tcrcd.net Light refreshments will be provided. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Wed Nov 30 13:11:19 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:11:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Community Meeting in Junction City December 7 to share observations, impressions of restoration efforts Message-ID: <4ED69BF7.1060902@tcrcd.net> * Trinity River Community Conversation* Wednesday, December 7th 6:00 - 7:30 pm - North Fork Grange Hall, Junction City Dutch Creek Road / Hwy 299 Join other Trinity River community members to discuss your impressions of the current river restoration efforts and share your observations about the Trinity River. Hosted by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District (530) 623 - 6004 www.tcrcd.net Light refreshments will be provided. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 12-7-11 Flyer.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 124177 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Thu Dec 1 11:02:48 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 11:02:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee editorial: "By working for Westlands, Wanger puts legacy in doubt, " further muddies water conflicts Message-ID: <4ED7CF58.9050103@tcrcd.net> sacbee.com This story is taken from Sacbee / Opinion / Editorials Editorial: By working for Westlands, Wanger puts legacy in doubt Published Thursday, Dec. 01, 2011 Of all the federal judges who have recently presided in California, none has had more impact on California water issues than just-retired U.S. District Court Judge Oliver W. Wanger of Fresno. Appointed by President George H.W. Bush in 1991, Wanger was at the center of highly contentious rulings on federal water contracts, endangered species protections and disputes over toxic drainage. On numerous occasions, the Westlands Water District -- the nation's largest agricultural district by value of crops -- was a party in those cases, and several times Wanger issued rulings favorable to this powerful water agency. Last December, for instance, Wanger invalidated a federal biological opinion intended to protect Delta smelt but opposed by Westlands and other contractors because of its proposed limits on water pumping from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Westlands praised Wanger in a press release, saying his "balanced and carefully articulated ruling marks another impact victory for good science and public interest." Wanger retired at the end of September, but not before verbally blasting federal scientists from the bench, calling one a "zealot" and suggesting that the other distorted the truth. His ruling in that case, which threw out a biological opinion intended to protect salmon, delighted water contractors, with Westlands General Manager Thomas Birmingham stating, "the court got it right again." Now we learn that Wanger, two months after stepping down from the bench, is going to work for Westlands. He will serve as the water district's lawyer in a case where environmental groups are claiming that interim water contracts for Westlands and other contractors violate state environmental law. Technically, Wanger does not appear to be in violation of ethics rules for ex-judges by agreeing to take this case. That's because the lawsuit doesn't involve a case he previously ruled upon. It involves alleged violations of a state statute, as opposed to the federal statutes that were heard in Wanger's court. Nonetheless, his decision to work for Westlands throws into question his past impartiality, since he was at the center of so many cases involving this water district and previously ruled on similar lawsuits involving federal statutes. It also doesn't help that on Oct. 3, just three days after Wanger left the bench, a major Westlands landowner emailed an invitation to growers announcing that Wanger would be the guest speaker at a political event for a local supervisor who used to clerk for Wanger. "Judge Oliver Wanger has been key in supporting Valley agriculture and its lawful access to essential water!," said the flier sent by Westlands grower Mark Borba. To be sure, in his 20-year career, Wanger issued rulings that went against Westlands, particularly one in late 2007 that determined that federal agencies had failed to adequately protect Delta smelt. That ruling resulted in a reduction of water pumping from the Delta during an already dry year, creating hardship and protests in the San Joaquin Valley and new rounds of litigation. Still, if he were truly interested in protecting his legacy as a judge, Wanger would have shied away from work with Westlands, environmental advocates or any group that previously appeared regularly before him. By taking a case for this water district, which already has several other former federal employees on its payroll, he has undermined the credibility of many of his past court decisions. Given that credibility was already in short supply as state and federal officials try to resolve water conflicts in the Delta, Wanger hasn't done Californians any favors. ? Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Thu Dec 1 11:06:44 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 11:06:44 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SAC New & Review Opinions: "Water Grab, Part II -- The Fix is In on the Delta Water Plan" Message-ID: <4ED7D044.4030708@tcrcd.net> N&R This article was printed from the Opinions section of the /Sacramento News & Review/, originally published December 1, 2011. This article may be read online at: http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/content?oid=4545794 Copyright ?2011 Chico Community Publishing, Inc. Printed on 2011-12-01. Water grab, part II The fix is in on the Delta Water Plan By Burt Wilson Burt Wilson a member of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan's Conveyance Committee and the Forum Sub-Committee of the 2013 State Water Plan *"One state, one water!"* I heard a Department of Water Resources employee blurt that out at a recent Delta Water Plan hearing. It's the latest DWR propaganda to get us to believe that Northern California water also belongs to Southern California. It has about as much credibility as compassionate conservatism. Still, it ranks second to the so-called "co-equal goals" of the Delta Water Plan. They're described in the California Water Code as 1. "providing a more reliable water supply for the state of California," and 2. "protecting, restoring, and enhancing the Delta ecosystem." In my view, these dual goals actually constitute a logical fallacy---a statement that may appear logical on the surface but is contradictory in fact. Ask any teacher of rhetoric; the dual goals are not co-equal, but mutually exclusive because they falsely propose that the Delta ecosystem can be saved by taking even more water from it! Hey! The Delta ecosystem was ruined years ago by huge water diversions to the south. Allow me to also decode these dual goals for you: 1. a "more reliable water supply for the state of California" means sending more Delta water south and, 2. "enhancing the Delta ecosystem" means they need a "cover story" to make their water grab appear to be an environmental benefit to the Delta. You ask, "How can the Delta Stewardship Council get away with proposing billions of dollars be spent under the aegis of such spurious goals?" The answer lies with the state Legislature. This is the body that wrote the co-equal goals into state law. So no matter how dubious and deceptive the Delta Water Plan may be, the DSC will be able to declare "We're only doing what is mandated to fulfill the law," as they continue to plot the ruination of the Delta. How will the plan be financed? The latest hair-brained scheme to come out of the DSC is that instead of raising taxes they will "make the beneficiaries pay." This sounds good until you figure out that it means raising your water rates with impunity. In fact, this is already happening around the state. In my 46 years of political and consumer activism (I worked on the campaign against the Peripheral Canal in 1982, which we won by a two-thirds vote statewide), I have never seen a state water project where the "fix" has been more "in" on so many cross-party levels. The fact that everything possible is being done to keep the Delta Water Plan from being voted upon by California citizens is indicative that something nefarious is going on. In past writings I have said that the California Business Roundtable and the construction industries in the southland need water to develop the high desert areas east of Los Angeles. Well, on October 27, the Obama administration unveiled its plans for solar-energy development in desert lands in the western United States. Thus "solar energy zones"---many in the Mojave Desert---will eventually open land for development. But they can't build if they can't certify there is enough water to sustain development. Can you guess where they're expecting the new water to come from? Do you think the feds are so dumb they will invest billions in solar energy in the desert before the water for development is secure? Or do you think someone in government knows something we don't and isn't telling us? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SNRBox.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1704 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Dec 2 09:14:46 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 09:14:46 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River advocates denounce restoration; network claims project poses harm to salmon Message-ID: <95A5A56F-46F1-4823-9AC2-CC73102A8CAA@att.net> Trinity River advocates denounce restoration; network claims project poses harm to salmon http://www.redding.com/news/2011/dec/01/trinity-river-advocates-denounce-restoration/ By Damon Arthur Thursday, December 1, 2011 A Trinity River advocacy group is demanding that work to restore salmon and trout numbers on the river be stopped until a review of the work is completed. Rather than help restore Chinook salmon, the Trinity River Restoration Program has made the river worse for salmon, according to the letter the California Water Impact Network sent to program officials this week. The network has asked that work stop on the river until there has been a review of projects completed to date. Project officials are reviewing the work, but restoration work also continues, said Robin Schrock, executive director of the program. "We vigorously object to both the design and construction of additional (river) mainstem projects in 2012 prior to completion of the Phase I review," states the letter sent to Schrock and Brian Person, chairman of the Trinity Management Council. Much of the work on the river has consisted of removing thick brush and adding gravel to improve spawning areas. But the network's letter, a follow-up to a similar one sent in March by the Trinity River Guide Association, states the gravel work has filled in pools. Side channels built in the river to protect juvenile salmon also have failed, the letter states. It goes on to say many of the river restoration projects have been an "abject failure." Schrock defended the work and said the project has followed the guidelines of the December 2000 U.S. Department of the Interior Record of Decision authorizing the work. In 2010, the goal was to have 6,000 fish return to the Trinity River. That year, 5,690 fish returned from the ocean, Schrock said. As of Nov. 12, 4,037 fall and spring run Chinook salmon have been counted in traps at the Trinity River Fish Hatchery, according to the California Department of Fish and Game. Even with those numbers, it is too early to tell whether the work on the river has been successful, she said. Work on the river did not begin until 2005. And there have been too few spawning cycles to properly evaluate the success of the projects, Schrock said. Salmon typically live three years in the ocean before returning to spawn and die in the river. Salmon and steelhead trout once migrated up the river by the hundreds of thousands, but after construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams, the numbers of fish migrating upstream fell significantly in the 1960s. Construction of those dams included diverting water from the Trinity River to the Sacramento River via Whiskeytown Lake. In 2000, the secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior, issued a decision authorizing work to restore the fishery and reducing the level of water being diverted to the Sacramento River. Schrock said 24 of 47 restoration projects have been completed. The project has spent roughly $36 million on the river, she said. For 2012 there are two projects planned. The river guides say in their March letter that some river work has damaged the river by filling in pools where adult fish live and has created excessive sediment in the stream. There has been no response to either the March guides' letter or Monday's letter, said Mount Shasta resident Tom Stokely, a former Trinity County planner who worked extensively on the Trinity River restoration before retiring. "They basically have just blown this off," Stokely said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Dec 3 09:50:41 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 09:50:41 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions Message-ID: <7595ACAA-0F43-402C-8480-04620B3E84D3@att.net> All, I have had several inquiries about the $36 million figure cited in the Redding Record Searchlight for expenditures to restore the Trinity River's fish. I did not make that statement and I have to assume that the $36 million is just what has been spent on the mainstem "restoration" projects, some of which have clearly failed (filled in side channels), but the article was not clear on that. I'm certain that it's not total expenditures because budgets have been $14-$15 million/year lately, so $36 million would be less than 3 years' budgets at current levels. I know that the "old" Trinity River Restoration Program alone spent something like $70 million. My guess is that total expenditures under the Trinity River Restoration Program, old and new, exceed $200 million. If somebody knows the real numbers, it would be greatly appreciated. It would be nice to set the record straight so that people know the magnitude of taxpayer money spent on this important program. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Sat Dec 3 10:27:48 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 10:27:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fish numbers also unclear in the Redding article Message-ID: <33CD5309-5217-40BE-8567-5376E6EFD510@att.net> All, The article in the Redding Record Searchlight was quite unclear and confusing on the issue of the TRRP's fishery restoration goals, perhaps not the fault of the reporter. It said: "In 2010, the goal was to have 6,000 fish return to the Trinity River. That year, 5,690 fish returned from the ocean, Schrock said. As of Nov. 12, 4,037 fall and spring run Chinook salmon have been counted in traps at the Trinity River Fish Hatchery, according to the California Department of Fish and Game." The actual fishery restoration goals for the Trinity River Restoration Program are as follows: Species In-River Goals Hatchery Goals Total Fall Chinook 62,000 9,000 71,000 Spring Chinook 6,000 3,000 9,000 Coho 1,400 2,100 3,500 Steelhead 40,000 10,000 50,000 I don't know what the total returning numbers of all species were in 2010 (perhaps somebody from DFG can tell us), but if it was only 5,690 total for spring and fall Chinook, the TRRP isn't even close to meeting the combined spring and fall Chinook goal of 80,000 fish. Enumeration of hatchery and natural spawners would also be useful. Obviously, the article also fails to mention that there are also goals for steelhead and Coho (and that little if anything is done by the program to restore those fish that largely spawn in the tributaries). Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Sat Dec 3 12:49:48 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 12:49:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions In-Reply-To: <7595ACAA-0F43-402C-8480-04620B3E84D3@att.net> References: <7595ACAA-0F43-402C-8480-04620B3E84D3@att.net> Message-ID: It would also be nice to know exactly how much is being spent on administrative overhead versus on the ground expenses. How much an organization spends to accomplish its mission is a clear indication of how properly funds are being spent. Just my two cents... Joshua Allen On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > All, > > I have had several inquiries about the $36 million figure cited in the > Redding Record Searchlight for expenditures to restore the Trinity River's > fish. I did not make that statement and I have to assume that the $36 > million is just what has been spent on the mainstem "restoration" projects, > some of which have clearly failed (filled in side channels), but the > article was not clear on that. I'm certain that it's not total > expenditures because budgets have been $14-$15 million/year lately, so $36 > million would be less than 3 years' budgets at current levels. I know that > the "old" Trinity River Restoration Program alone spent something like $70 > million. > > My guess is that total expenditures under the Trinity River Restoration > Program, old and new, exceed $200 million. > > If somebody knows the real numbers, it would be greatly appreciated. It > would be nice to set the record straight so that people know the magnitude > of taxpayer money spent on this important program. > > Tom Stokely > Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact > California Water Impact Network > V/FAX 530-926-9727 > Cell 530-524-0315 > tstokely at att.net > http://www.c-win.org > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Dec 2 11:42:17 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 11:42:17 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping summaries References: <4ED8B657.1B1D.0039.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: <63051222-A4CC-49A0-AA93-35BA7530CA9F@att.net> From: Wade Sinnen Date: December 2, 2011 11:29:47 AM PST To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Trinity River trapping summaries Folks, The attached spreadsheet contains the latest information available for Trinity River weir and Hatchery counts. The Junction weir was removed at the end of September and the Willow Creek weir was removed November 21st due to high flows. I will continue to send periodic updates for Trinity River Hatchery as the data becomes available. Give me a shout if you have any questions. Regards, Wade Wade Sinnen Acting Senior Environmental Scientist Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 85504 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From acaswr at yahoo.com Sat Dec 3 17:39:28 2011 From: acaswr at yahoo.com (lou jacobson) Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 17:39:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions In-Reply-To: References: <7595ACAA-0F43-402C-8480-04620B3E84D3@att.net> Message-ID: <1322962768.15678.YahooMailNeo@web120201.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> All that information should be public. Perhaps someone should put a request in with TRRP? I have to disagree with Josh that an admin to total budget/implementation? is a clear indication of how properly funds are being spent. I won't argue that it's not an important factor. I'll even agree that in some cases it can be used as a tool to identify top heavy program design. I think the admin to budget/implementation comparisons are important but they are only one factor of many that should be used to judge a program. I'd like to see their scope of work, project milestones, budget, etc..., and then see how they're performing based on the current admin load. I don't know, they could be pissing money down the admin stream but I don't think project success/failure is that black and white. Some programs are inherently admin heavy. Lou Jacobson ________________________________ From: Joshua Allen To: Tom Stokely ; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 12:49 PM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions It would?also?be nice to know exactly how much is being spent on administrative overhead versus on?the?ground expenses. How much an organization spends to accomplish its mission is a clear indication of how properly funds are being spent. Just my two cents... Joshua Allen On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: All, > >I have had several inquiries about the $36 million figure cited in the Redding Record Searchlight for expenditures to restore the Trinity River's fish. ?I did not make that statement and I have to assume that the $36 million is just what has been spent on the mainstem "restoration" projects, some of which have clearly failed (filled in side channels), but the article was not clear on that. ?I'm certain that it's not total expenditures because budgets have been $14-$15 million/year lately, so $36 million would be less than 3 years' budgets at current levels. ?I know that the "old" Trinity River Restoration Program alone spent something like $70 million. > >My guess is that total expenditures under the Trinity River Restoration Program, old and new, exceed $200 million. > >If somebody knows the real numbers, it would be greatly appreciated. ?It would be nice to set the record straight so that people know the magnitude of taxpayer money spent on this important program. > >Tom Stokely >Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact >California Water Impact Network >V/FAX 530-926-9727 >Cell 530-524-0315 >tstokely at att.net >http://www.c-win.org > >_______________________________________________ >env-trinity mailing list >env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Sat Dec 3 17:53:04 2011 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 17:53:04 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions In-Reply-To: <1322962768.15678.YahooMailNeo@web120201.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <7595ACAA-0F43-402C-8480-04620B3E84D3@att.net> <1322962768.15678.YahooMailNeo@web120201.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: We can agree to disagree. Though as someone studying public administration, any organization that is admin heavy needs to be critically evaluated. Especially if it over 15%. Taxpayer funds are being used and if used incorrectly its just a waste of money paying salaries instead of getting mission goals completed. A long time complaint of the program is that its a bunch of egg-head scientists who would rather implement studies and write expensive environmental documents instead of doing actual on the ground work. Especially when its a program that continues doing the same thing expecting different results. Josh On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 5:39 PM, lou jacobson wrote: > All that information should be public. Perhaps someone should put a > request in with TRRP? > > I have to disagree with Josh that an admin to total budget/implementation > is a clear indication of how properly funds are being spent. I won't argue > that it's not an important factor. I'll even agree that in some cases it > can be used as a tool to identify top heavy program design. I think the > admin to budget/implementation comparisons are important but they are only > one factor of many that should be used to judge a program. I'd like to > see their scope of work, project milestones, budget, etc..., and then see > how they're performing based on the current admin load. I don't know, they > could be pissing money down the admin stream but I don't think project > success/failure is that black and white. Some programs are inherently admin > heavy. > > Lou Jacobson > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Joshua Allen > *To:* Tom Stokely ; > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > *Sent:* Saturday, December 3, 2011 12:49 PM > > *Subject:* Re: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions > > It would also be nice to know exactly how much is being spent on > administrative overhead versus on the ground expenses. How much an > organization spends to accomplish its mission is a clear indication of how > properly funds are being spent. Just my two cents... > > Joshua Allen > > On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > > All, > > I have had several inquiries about the $36 million figure cited in the > Redding Record Searchlight for expenditures to restore the Trinity River's > fish. I did not make that statement and I have to assume that the $36 > million is just what has been spent on the mainstem "restoration" projects, > some of which have clearly failed (filled in side channels), but the > article was not clear on that. I'm certain that it's not total > expenditures because budgets have been $14-$15 million/year lately, so $36 > million would be less than 3 years' budgets at current levels. I know that > the "old" Trinity River Restoration Program alone spent something like $70 > million. > > My guess is that total expenditures under the Trinity River Restoration > Program, old and new, exceed $200 million. > > If somebody knows the real numbers, it would be greatly appreciated. It > would be nice to set the record straight so that people know the magnitude > of taxpayer money spent on this important program. > > Tom Stokely > Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact > California Water Impact Network > V/FAX 530-926-9727 > Cell 530-524-0315 > tstokely at att.net > http://www.c-win.org > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From martintrso at sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 3 19:17:08 2011 From: martintrso at sbcglobal.net (Martin Trso) Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 19:17:08 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Everyone, Seven or eight years ago I was retained by TRRP to independently evalute the USBOR's erosion- and sediment-control programs in the Grass Valley Creek (GVC) watershed. I was excited to work on such a program, as it provided a wonderful opportunity to assess the potential of watershed enhancement and restoration projects (as well as the state of our knowledge of the rehabilitation treatments, BMPs, etc.) in central and northern California. USBOR retained me to provide a compilation and review of the past erosion and sediment yield programs and treatments, and evaluate their effectiveness and cost/benefit. This work involved developing 'my own' sediment source analysis (SSA) for the GVC watershed, and reconciling several different SSAs which were put together by various agencies and consultants over the past few decades. Additionally, my scope included providing recommendations to the Trinity River Restoration Program to prioritize future sediment-management and GVC watershed rehabilitation actions based on cost and technical effectiveness, and suggesting the future watershed restoration work necessary in the upper Trinity River Basin to restore the anadromous fishery in the Trinity River. I admit that I was surprised by the very large number, and the associated large cost, of these GVC watershed programs, some of them starting in the mid-1970s but majority starting around 1985, and the much, much lower estimated cost/benefit--in terms of sediment 'saved'--compared to the specific-program-motivating estimates. My results were presented at a small symposium: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reports/tamwg/meeting06_dec_03/05_sedime nt_symposium_agenda.pdf I was also surprised by large differences among the various SSAs, both in terms of the sediment-source types and the magnitudes of their sediment deliveries. The SSAs also lacked a spatially-explicit detail. Some of the SSAs failed to report on the following major sediment sources: 1) surface erosion and mass wasting across very large deep-seated landslides; and 2) recent, unconsolidated valley-floor alluvial deposits. In no way do I mean disrespect to the USBOR-funded rehabilitation efforts, especially those by the local RCD and NRCS, who work very hard, no doubt, on minimizing the hillslope sediment sources across the affected tributary basins. However, it must be said that these rehabilitation efforts were primarily motivated by the various and not-so-accurate/detailed past SSAs. Though I recommended it, I am not aware if newer and more accurate SSAs were conducted in the tributary watersheds since 2004. My report, see the reference below, was not published by BOR, but it is referenced in these recent reports by Andreas Krause, PE, and David Gaeuman: http://acwi.gov/sos/pubs/2ndJFIC/Contents/3D_Krause_3_1_10.pdf http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&gbv=2&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1717 2l25156l0l26109l30l25l0l19l19l0l531l2108l0.1.2.1.0.2l6l0&q=cache:TDDfJXPnPcU J:http://209.207.67.215/Trinity/DocumentLibraryFiles/TM-TRRP-2008-1.pdf+mart in+trso+grass+valley+creek&ct=clnk Martin Trso, R.G. 2004. Trinity River Restoration Program: Evaluation of Grass Valley Creek Watershed Restoration Activities. Technical report prepared for U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 88 pages. Feel free to email me with questions, especially those pertaining to the costs of the various pre-2004 programs in the GVC watershed. I am sure that USBOR could also make my report available to the public. Thank you. Sincerely, Martin Trso ______________ Martin Trso, PG, CPG, CPESC Consulting Geomorphologist Office phone (510) 848-3525 Cell phone (510) 378-4227 www.linkedin.com/in/martintrso martintrso at sbcglobal.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us]On Behalf Of Joshua Allen Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 5:53 PM To: Trinity List Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions We can agree to disagree. Though as someone studying public administration, any organization that is admin heavy needs to be critically evaluated. Especially if it over 15%. Taxpayer funds are being used and if used incorrectly its just a waste of money paying salaries instead of getting mission goals completed. A long time complaint of the program is that its a bunch of egg-head scientists who would rather implement studies and write expensive environmental documents instead of doing actual on the ground work. Especially when its a program that continues doing the same thing expecting different results. Josh On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 5:39 PM, lou jacobson wrote: All that information should be public. Perhaps someone should put a request in with TRRP? I have to disagree with Josh that an admin to total budget/implementation is a clear indication of how properly funds are being spent. I won't argue that it's not an important factor. I'll even agree that in some cases it can be used as a tool to identify top heavy program design. I think the admin to budget/implementation comparisons are important but they are only one factor of many that should be used to judge a program. I'd like to see their scope of work, project milestones, budget, etc..., and then see how they're performing based on the current admin load. I don't know, they could be pissing money down the admin stream but I don't think project success/failure is that black and white. Some programs are inherently admin heavy. Lou Jacobson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- From: Joshua Allen To: Tom Stokely ; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 12:49 PM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions It would also be nice to know exactly how much is being spent on administrative overhead versus on the ground expenses. How much an organization spends to accomplish its mission is a clear indication of how properly funds are being spent. Just my two cents... Joshua Allen On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: All, I have had several inquiries about the $36 million figure cited in the Redding Record Searchlight for expenditures to restore the Trinity River's fish. I did not make that statement and I have to assume that the $36 million is just what has been spent on the mainstem "restoration" projects, some of which have clearly failed (filled in side channels), but the article was not clear on that. I'm certain that it's not total expenditures because budgets have been $14-$15 million/year lately, so $36 million would be less than 3 years' budgets at current levels. I know that the "old" Trinity River Restoration Program alone spent something like $70 million. My guess is that total expenditures under the Trinity River Restoration Program, old and new, exceed $200 million. If somebody knows the real numbers, it would be greatly appreciated. It would be nice to set the record straight so that people know the magnitude of taxpayer money spent on this important program. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From martintrso at sbcglobal.net Sun Dec 4 10:31:19 2011 From: martintrso at sbcglobal.net (Martin Trso) Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 10:31:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: Trinity River Budget, Trso report available Message-ID: Good morning Everyone, I was reminded by a colleague that my report is available online: http://odp.trrp.net/FileDatabase/Documents/Evaluation_GVC_Watershed_Activiti es_final.pdf The budget for this Evaluation was very limited ($25,075.00), and I did my best with the limited resources. To my disappointment, TRRP never contacted me to be of assistance on their watershed restoration projects, though they had made sure to make such an invitation to me while I worked on the Evaluation. My presence would have helped cut their costs significantly, if I am to believe the values presented by Mr. Stokely below!! Please contact Andreas Krause, PE, for details about how my recommendations may have been implemented on USBOR's restoration projects in the Upper Trinity River watershed. Martin Trso ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- From: Martin Trso [mailto:martintrso at sbcglobal.net] Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 7:17 PM To: Joshua Allen; Trinity List; Tom Stokely Subject: RE: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions Hi Everyone, Seven or eight years ago I was retained by TRRP to independently evalute the USBOR's erosion- and sediment-control programs in the Grass Valley Creek (GVC) watershed. I was excited to work on such a program, as it provided a wonderful opportunity to assess the potential of watershed enhancement and restoration projects (as well as the state of our knowledge of the rehabilitation treatments, BMPs, etc.) in central and northern California. USBOR retained me to provide a compilation and review of the past erosion and sediment yield programs and treatments, and evaluate their effectiveness and cost/benefit. This work involved developing 'my own' sediment source analysis (SSA) for the GVC watershed, and reconciling several different SSAs which were put together by various agencies and consultants over the past few decades. Additionally, my scope included providing recommendations to the Trinity River Restoration Program to prioritize future sediment-management and GVC watershed rehabilitation actions based on cost and technical effectiveness, and suggesting the future watershed restoration work necessary in the upper Trinity River Basin to restore the anadromous fishery in the Trinity River. I admit that I was surprised by the very large number, and the associated large cost, of these GVC watershed programs, some of them starting in the mid-1970s but majority starting around 1985, and the much, much lower estimated cost/benefit--in terms of sediment 'saved'--compared to the specific-program-motivating estimates. My results were presented at a small symposium: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reports/tamwg/meeting06_dec_03/05_sedime nt_symposium_agenda.pdf I was also surprised by large differences among the various SSAs, both in terms of the sediment-source types and the magnitudes of their sediment deliveries. The SSAs also lacked a spatially-explicit detail. Some of the SSAs failed to report on the following major sediment sources: 1) surface erosion and mass wasting across very large deep-seated landslides; and 2) recent, unconsolidated valley-floor alluvial deposits. In no way do I mean disrespect to the USBOR-funded rehabilitation efforts, especially those by the local RCD and NRCS, who work very hard, no doubt, on minimizing the hillslope sediment sources across the affected tributary basins. However, it must be said that these rehabilitation efforts were primarily motivated by the various and not-so-accurate/detailed past SSAs. Though I recommended it, I am not aware if newer and more accurate SSAs were conducted in the tributary watersheds since 2004. My report, see the reference below, was not published by BOR, but it is referenced in these recent reports by Andreas Krause, PE, and David Gaeuman: http://acwi.gov/sos/pubs/2ndJFIC/Contents/3D_Krause_3_1_10.pdf http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&gbv=2&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1717 2l25156l0l26109l30l25l0l19l19l0l531l2108l0.1.2.1.0.2l6l0&q=cache:TDDfJXPnPcU J:http://209.207.67.215/Trinity/DocumentLibraryFiles/TM-TRRP-2008-1.pdf+mart in+trso+grass+valley+creek&ct=clnk Martin Trso, R.G. 2004. Trinity River Restoration Program: Evaluation of Grass Valley Creek Watershed Restoration Activities. Technical report prepared for U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 88 pages. Feel free to email me with questions, especially those pertaining to the costs of the various pre-2004 programs in the GVC watershed. I am sure that USBOR could also make my report available to the public. Thank you. Sincerely, Martin Trso ______________ Martin Trso, PG, CPG, CPESC Consulting Geomorphologist Office phone (510) 848-3525 Cell phone (510) 378-4227 www.linkedin.com/in/martintrso martintrso at sbcglobal.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us]On Behalf Of Joshua Allen Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 5:53 PM To: Trinity List Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions We can agree to disagree. Though as someone studying public administration, any organization that is admin heavy needs to be critically evaluated. Especially if it over 15%. Taxpayer funds are being used and if used incorrectly its just a waste of money paying salaries instead of getting mission goals completed. A long time complaint of the program is that its a bunch of egg-head scientists who would rather implement studies and write expensive environmental documents instead of doing actual on the ground work. Especially when its a program that continues doing the same thing expecting different results. Josh On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 5:39 PM, lou jacobson wrote: All that information should be public. Perhaps someone should put a request in with TRRP? I have to disagree with Josh that an admin to total budget/implementation is a clear indication of how properly funds are being spent. I won't argue that it's not an important factor. I'll even agree that in some cases it can be used as a tool to identify top heavy program design. I think the admin to budget/implementation comparisons are important but they are only one factor of many that should be used to judge a program. I'd like to see their scope of work, project milestones, budget, etc..., and then see how they're performing based on the current admin load. I don't know, they could be pissing money down the admin stream but I don't think project success/failure is that black and white. Some programs are inherently admin heavy. Lou Jacobson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- From: Joshua Allen To: Tom Stokely ; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 12:49 PM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity River Budget Questions It would also be nice to know exactly how much is being spent on administrative overhead versus on the ground expenses. How much an organization spends to accomplish its mission is a clear indication of how properly funds are being spent. Just my two cents... Joshua Allen On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: All, I have had several inquiries about the $36 million figure cited in the Redding Record Searchlight for expenditures to restore the Trinity River's fish. I did not make that statement and I have to assume that the $36 million is just what has been spent on the mainstem "restoration" projects, some of which have clearly failed (filled in side channels), but the article was not clear on that. I'm certain that it's not total expenditures because budgets have been $14-$15 million/year lately, so $36 million would be less than 3 years' budgets at current levels. I know that the "old" Trinity River Restoration Program alone spent something like $70 million. My guess is that total expenditures under the Trinity River Restoration Program, old and new, exceed $200 million. If somebody knows the real numbers, it would be greatly appreciated. It would be nice to set the record straight so that people know the magnitude of taxpayer money spent on this important program. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Sun Dec 4 17:52:12 2011 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 20:52:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Walters- Oregon dam removal may cost California Message-ID: <21189.3ef054dc.3c0d7dcc@aol.com> Colleagues --- Dan Walters' criticism of investing California tax money in Klamath River salmon restoration efforts, particularly in four-dam removal in what would be the largest dam removal, and one of the most ambitious watershed restoration efforts, in the world comes down to this: Do you think a one-time investment of perhaps $90 million in California tax dollars toward dam removal to help restore the third largest salmon runs in the nation outside Alaska is worth it, in light of the conservatively projected results: a more than 80% increase in salmon returning adult numbers per year in the Klamath, and more than a 46% increase in ocean commercial, and 58% Tribal harvest increase, harvest opportunities all the way up and down the coast, with the major job benefits in California -- is worth the investment? These are the salmon economic benefits calculated (conservatively I might add) to flow from the Klamath Dam removal project under the Settlement Agreement in the recently published Draft Environmental Impacts Statement, posted at: _www.klamathrestoration.gov_ (http://www.klamathrestoration.gov) . Check out especially the 4-page summary of economic impacts, and the 4-page Summary of Key Conclusions both at: _http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR/download-draft-eis-eir_ (http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR/download-draft-eis-eir) Among other economic benefits, this would restore hundreds of salmon-dependent jobs coastwide, plus the balance of some 4,600 jobs total estimated in the DEIS. See the DEIS for detailed analysis. There is a very long history in California, as elsewhere, in investing tax payer money in watershed and natural resource restoration projects for a very good reason. It helps the economy. In this case it boils down to whether its a good idea to invest (one-time) that $90 million in California tax funds (raised through conservation bonds, as is the general practice) to help stabilize, protect and restore a $150 million/year California salmon economy threatened by complete closures every time the salmon runs in the Klamath collapse. The complete closure of the California ocean commercial salmon season in 2006 is what we have to look forward to more and more unless things improve for salmon in the Klamath. We at PCFFA -- not to mention the affected coastal county of Humboldt -- believe this is a very smart investment in California's economic future. Apparently Dan Walters believes otherwise. But that is his sort-sightedness, not ours. ============================================= Glen H. Spain, NW Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 O:(541)689-2000 -- Fax:(541)689-2500 Email: fish1ifr at aol.com Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) In a message dated 11/30/2011 11:26:24 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, tstokely at att.net writes: Oregon dam removal may cost California _http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/11/24/2626954/oregon-dam-removal-may-cost-cal ifornia.html_ (http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/11/24/2626954/oregon-dam-removal-may-cost-california.html) _3 Comments_ (http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/11/24/2626954/oregon-dam-removal-may-cost-california.html#disqus_thread) (go to the website above to see them- they are all interesting) Thursday, Nov. 24, 2011 | 09:42 PM The California Oregon Power Co. was founded in 1911 to supply electricity to the southernmost Oregon counties and the northernmost California counties. It built four hydroelectric power dams on the Klamath River. The Klamath cuts across California's northwestern corner and is incredibly remote. Until those dams were built, blocking spawning runs, it supported an immense salmon and steelhead fishery that sustained Indian tribes living along its banks. COPCO merged with Pacific Power and Light Co. in 1961. PP&L eventually changed its name to PacificCorp, and in 2005 was acquired by Warren Buffett. Those Klamath River dams have become very contentious factors in a controversy over how the river's waters should be managed, involving not only their effect on fish, but the water supplies of farmers in the Klamath Basin, the southern Oregon region where the river begins. While Indian tribes and commercial fishermen demand elimination of the dams to restore fish runs, farmers worry about irrigation water. The factions have worked out a deal to remove the four dams and restore fish habitat, while protecting water supplies for those farmers. California Rep. Mike Thompson, a Democrat who represents the North Coast, and Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkeley, have introduced legislation to implement it. However, a big sticking point is its cost, about a billion dollars. Thompson and Merkeley want the federal government to pay half, which already is drawing opposition in a Republican-controlled Congress. PacificCorp would pay about 25%. The remaining $250 million? The two legislators say it would come from "non-federal sources." They don't say that it would come from California taxpayers, specifically a $250 million chunk of the $11.1 billion state water bond that is scheduled to go before voters next year. And why should California taxpayers be on the hook? The dams' removal would have no effect, positive or negative, on our water supply. The semi-official rationale -- weak at best -- is that improving fish runs on the Klamath would offset losses of habitat in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. But the bottom line is that, with interest on the bonds, it's a half-billion-dollar gift from California taxpayers to Oregon farmers and Warren Buffett, because PacificCorp would otherwise have to pay for the dams' removal or attempt to get them relicensed, a virtual impossibility. Given the season, one could say that it's a real turkey. DAN WALTERS WRITES FOR THE BEE?S CAPITOL BUREAU. E-MAIL: _DWALTERS at SACBEE.COM_ (mailto:dwalters at sacbee.com) ; MAIL: P.O. BOX 15779, SACRAMENTO, CA 95852. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Sun Dec 4 18:22:01 2011 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 18:22:01 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Walters- Oregon dam removal may cost California In-Reply-To: <21189.3ef054dc.3c0d7dcc@aol.com> References: <21189.3ef054dc.3c0d7dcc@aol.com> Message-ID: <1AC71FC8-ED68-4459-A17F-A7B588FE93CF@fishsniffer.com> Glen Walters is a political hack that keeps droning on and on in the Bee. He outlived his purpose, whatever it was, over 20 years go. I disagree with Walters' contention that using public money for Klamath dam removal is unwarranted. However, we must absolutely remove ANY Klamath dam removal money from the Water Bond, which creates the infrastructure for a peripheral canal and new dams. Steinberg, the corporate neo-liberal Democrats, the corporate neo-con Republicans and the worst Governor in California history, Arnold Schwarzenegger, put the Klamath money in the bond to falsely link Klamath Dam removal to building a peripheral canal and new dams. Thanks Dan On Dec 4, 2011, at 5:52 PM, FISH1IFR at aol.com wrote: > Colleagues --- > > Dan Walters' criticism of investing California tax money in Klamath > River salmon restoration efforts, particularly in four-dam removal > in what would be the largest dam removal, and one of the most > ambitious watershed restoration efforts, in the world comes down to > this: Do you think a one-time investment of perhaps $90 million in > California tax dollars toward dam removal to help restore the third > largest salmon runs in the nation outside Alaska is worth it, in > light of the conservatively projected results: a more than 80% > increase in salmon returning adult numbers per year in the Klamath, > and more than a 46% increase in ocean commercial, and 58% Tribal > harvest increase, harvest opportunities all the way up and down the > coast, with the major job benefits in California -- is worth the > investment? > > These are the salmon economic benefits calculated (conservatively I > might add) to flow from the Klamath Dam removal project under the > Settlement Agreement in the recently published Draft Environmental > Impacts Statement, posted at: www.klamathrestoration.gov. Check > out especially the 4-page summary of economic impacts, and the 4- > page Summary of Key Conclusions both at: > > http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR/download-draft-eis- > eir > > Among other economic benefits, this would restore hundreds of > salmon-dependent jobs coastwide, plus the balance of some 4,600 > jobs total estimated in the DEIS. See the DEIS for detailed analysis. > > There is a very long history in California, as elsewhere, in > investing tax payer money in watershed and natural resource > restoration projects for a very good reason. It helps the > economy. In this case it boils down to whether its a good idea to > invest (one-time) that $90 million in California tax funds (raised > through conservation bonds, as is the general practice) to help > stabilize, protect and restore a $150 million/year California > salmon economy threatened by complete closures every time the > salmon runs in the Klamath collapse. The complete closure of the > California ocean commercial salmon season in 2006 is what we have > to look forward to more and more unless things improve for salmon > in the Klamath. > > We at PCFFA -- not to mention the affected coastal county of > Humboldt -- believe this is a very smart investment in California's > economic future. > > Apparently Dan Walters believes otherwise. But that is his sort- > sightedness, not ours. > > > ============================================= > Glen H. Spain, NW Regional Director > Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) > PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 > O:(541)689-2000 -- Fax:(541)689-2500 > Email: fish1ifr at aol.com > Home Page: www.pcffa.org > > > > > > In a message dated 11/30/2011 11:26:24 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > tstokely at att.net writes: > Oregon dam removal may cost California > http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/11/24/2626954/oregon-dam-removal-may- > cost-california.html > > 3 Comments (go to the website above to see them- they are all > interesting) > > Thursday, Nov. 24, 2011 | 09:42 PM > The California Oregon Power Co. was founded in 1911 to supply > electricity to the southernmost Oregon counties and the > northernmost California counties. It built four hydroelectric power > dams on the Klamath River. > > The Klamath cuts across California's northwestern corner and is > incredibly remote. Until those dams were built, blocking spawning > runs, it supported an immense salmon and steelhead fishery that > sustained Indian tribes living along its banks. > > COPCO merged with Pacific Power and Light Co. in 1961. PP&L > eventually changed its name to PacificCorp, and in 2005 was > acquired by Warren Buffett. > > Those Klamath River dams have become very contentious factors in a > controversy over how the river's waters should be managed, > involving not only their effect on fish, but the water supplies > of farmers in the Klamath Basin, the southern Oregon region where > the river begins. > > While Indian tribes and commercial fishermen demand elimination of > the dams to restore fish runs, farmers worry about irrigation water. > > The factions have worked out a deal to remove the four dams and > restore fish habitat, while protecting water supplies for those > farmers. California Rep. Mike Thompson, a Democrat who represents > the North Coast, and Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkeley, have introduced > legislation to implement it. > > However, a big sticking point is its cost, about a billion dollars. > Thompson and Merkeley want the federal government to pay half, > which already is drawing opposition in a Republican-controlled > Congress. PacificCorp would pay about 25%. The remaining $250 million? > > The two legislators say it would come from "non-federal sources." > > They don't say that it would come from California taxpayers, > specifically a $250 million chunk of the $11.1 billion state water > bond that is scheduled to go before voters next year. > > And why should California taxpayers be on the hook? > > The dams' removal would have no effect, positive or negative, on > our water supply. The semi-official rationale -- weak at best -- is > that improving fish runs on the Klamath would offset losses of > habitat in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. > > But the bottom line is that, with interest on the bonds, it's a > half-billion-dollar gift from California taxpayers to Oregon > farmers and Warren Buffett, because PacificCorp would otherwise > have to pay for the dams' removal or attempt to get them > relicensed, a virtual impossibility. > > Given the season, one could say that it's a real turkey. > > > [Unable to display image] > DAN WALTERS WRITES FOR THE BEE?S CAPITOL BUREAU. E-MAIL: > DWALTERS at SACBEE.COM; MAIL: P.O. BOX 15779, SACRAMENTO, CA 95852. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Sun Dec 4 19:02:33 2011 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 22:02:33 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Walters- Oregon dam removal may cost California Message-ID: <2741d.13479d1b.3c0d8e48@aol.com> In a message dated 12/4/2011 6:22:07 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, danielbacher at fishsniffer.com writes: I disagree with Walters' contention that using public money for Klamath dam removal is unwarranted. However, we must absolutely remove ANY Klamath dam removal money from the Water Bond, which creates the infrastructure for a peripheral canal and new dams. Daniel... I was only commenting on Walters assertion that tax money should not be invested in Klamath restoration efforts at all, in any way. Fortunately, there are many other ways to do this than the current Water Bond, with all its warts, riders and hanger-on projects, including the "peripheral canal" in disguise, many of which California does not need and should not build. Point well taken. While PCFFA supports California investments in the Klamath per se, we OPPOSED the current Water Bond because of its "peripheral canal" poison pill attachment. But investing in salmon restoration measures in the Klamath is a good investment in itself, and deserves support in and of itself. That was my point, if there was any confusion in what I previously wrote. ============================================= Glen H. Spain, NW Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 O:(541)689-2000 -- Fax:(541)689-2500 Email: fish1ifr at aol.com Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From awhitridge at dishmail.net Mon Dec 5 06:04:43 2011 From: awhitridge at dishmail.net (Arnold Whitridge) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 06:04:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG meeting Friday, December 9 Message-ID: <5501C66F19E547648087B6D63635AB5B@arnPC> The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group will meet Friday, December 9 at the Trinity County Library in Weaverville; the proposed agenda is conveniently inserted below. TAMWG is a federal advisory committee chartered to provide advice to the Trinity Management Council. All TAMWG meetings are open to the public. Arnold Whitridge, TAMWG chair Proposed Agenda TRINITY ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP Friday, December 9, 2011 Trinity County Library, Weaverville, CA Time Presentation, Discussion, and/or Action on: Presenter 1. 9:30 Adopt agenda; approve minutes from September 2. 9:45 Open forum; public comment 3. 10:00 TMC Chair report Brian Person (tentative) 4. 10:30 Review of Phase 1 Channel Rehabilitation Projects D.J. Bandrowski 5. 11:00 2012 Channel Rehabilitation Projects D.J. Bandrowski 6. 11:30 Large Woody Debris & Public Safety TAMWG members 12:00 lunch 7. 1:00 Science program updates- 2012 tasks; 2013 planning, Ernie Clarke system vs project level monitoring; performance measures 8. 1:30 "Big Questions" for TRRP guidance and assessment Ernie Clarke 9. 2:30 Watershed projects in 2012; Watershed Assessment Robin Schrock 10. 3:00 Executive Director's report- TRRP Outreach, Robin Schrock evolving role of Interdisciplinary Team and workgroups; hatchery marking considerations to date. 11. 4:00 Designated Federal Officer topics Randy Brown 5:00 Adjourn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 5 10:24:53 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:24:53 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding Record Searchlight Editorial: Natural allies are senselessly at odds on Trinity River Message-ID: Editorial: Natural allies are senselessly at odds on Trinity River Posted December 5, 2011 at midnight http://www.redding.com/news/2011/dec/05/editorial-natural-allies-are-senselessly-at-odds/?partner=RSS If you wanted to do the best possible job restoring a river's fish habitat ? the noble goal of the Trinity River Restoration Program ? wouldn't it make sense to keep tight lines of communication with the anglers who spend so many days on that river? The steelhead guides might not have precisely the same perspective as the biologists, but in the big picture they're emphatically on the same team. And those fishermen are certainly a busy set of eyes on the river, a good source of ground truth. Yet to hear the Trinity River Guides Association tell it, the head of the Trinity River Restoration Program and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation have blown off concerns that guides raised about negative side-effects or outright failures of river "improvements." The agencies never even bothered to respond, at least formally and in writing, to a March letter that pointed to flaws and called for a moratorium to review what's worked and what hasn't, before forging ahead. In a nutshell, the guides complain that efforts to restock the river with gravel and cut new side channels to improve spawning conditions and habitat for juvenile fish had, inadvertently, filled in the deeper pools vital for adult fish. They don't want to stop the recovery of the Trinity. Far from it. They just want to get it right. Is a moratorium on Trinity River projects the right call? Maybe not. Robin Schrock, director of the program, defends its work. But the philosophy behind these kinds of projects is "adaptive management" ? which means learning as you go and adjusting course as needed. That surely includes listening to the guides who have logged, by their count, "tens of thousands of hours of personal observation of the river." Teaming with the California Water Impact Network, the guides wrote in a letter last week that they'll be digging in for a fight against any further work. One way or another, their complaints will surely be addressed. It's just senseless these natural allies should have to resort to legal threats to get a hearing. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 5 12:51:54 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 12:51:54 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Fish numbers Message-ID: All, Below is a chart, courtesy of the CA Department of Fish and Game, showing returning Trinity River fish numbers, including what percentage of the natural and hatchery goals were met. Also included is the Department of Fish and Game's "Megatable" for Klamath-Trinity fall Chinook. All 2010 numbers are subject to revision. Hopefully this clear up some of the confusion about returning fish numbers in the Trinity River. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2010_CDFG_Chinook_MEGTBL_prelim_Feb_3_11.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 117514 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: adultescapetable.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 10692 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Mon Dec 5 15:18:53 2011 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 15:18:53 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Guides, conservationists demand moratorium on Trinity River channel projects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2011/12/03/guides- conservationists-demand-moratorium-on-trinity-river-channel-projects/ Photo of Trinity River courtesy of Wikipedia. ? 280px-trinityriverca.jpg Guides, conservationists demand moratorium on Trinity River channel projects By Dan Bacher History is repeating itself on the Trinity River as fishing guides and environmental activists unite to stop a controversial channel restoration project funded by the federal government. In 1993, Byron Leydecker, the late founder of Friends of the Trinity River, got stuck in the mud while fishing on the river with Herb Burton of Trinity Fly Shop. The sediment was discharged into the river by a restoration project funded by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The incident so outraged the two anglers that it led to the formation of a broad coalition of recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, environmentalists, the Hoopa Valley Tribe, the Yurok Tribe and local residents to restore the Trinity River back to its former greatness as a fishery. The river restoration campaign led to the Trinity Record of Decision signed by former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt and former Hoopa Valley Tribe Chairman Duane Sherman in Hoopa on December 19, 2000. The ROD, for the first time ever since the construction of Trinity Dam, allowed 47 percent of the water to flow down the Trinity rather than being diverted to the Sacramento River via Whiskeytown Reservoir. Now the future of the Trinity River is under assault by the same misguided projects that spurred the campaign to restore the Trinity in the first place. On November 28, the Trinity River Guides Association and the California Water Impact Network asked the Trinity River Restoration Program to ?take a break? to determine if river restoration projects completed to date have met their objectives or had unintended impacts. The letter states that there is public concern about significant filling of pool habitat for adult salmon and steelhead from excessive gravel introduction into the river channel as well as numerous side channel failures. ?Numerous side channels constructed in the Trinity River prior to and since the 2000 Trinity Record of Decision (Trinity ROD) have completely failed,? according to the letter. ?The 80,000 tons of spawning gravel placed in the river near Lewiston over the past few years have continued to overwhelm approximately twenty significant adult fish holding/staging pools in the river upstream of Douglas City, with no scouring of additional pools to replace them.? Bill Dickens of the Guides Association said, ?There is no choice but to oppose this type of project until an evaluation of the existing projects is complete. We are just asking the Restoration Program to do what is already required as part of the Trinity River Record of Decision.? ?As fishing guides, we fully support restoration of the river?s fisheries, but we?re not convinced that they are doing it the right way. It?s time to take a break and look at what?s been done before tens of millions of additional taxpayer dollars are spent,? Dickens noted. Tom Stokely with C-WIN said, ?The Interior Department and the Trinity River Restoration Program are not responsive to public concerns. The Guides Association wrote a letter on March 14, 2011 that has still not received a response. It?s inexcusable.? C-WIN is the successor organization to Friends of Trinity River that closed earlier this year after the passing of Friends founder Byron Leydecker, according to Stokely. Robin Schrock, the program?s executive director, defended the restoration work in an interview with the Redding Record Searchlight (http://www.redding.com/news/2011/dec/01/trinity-river-advocates- denounce-restoration). She claimed the program has followed the guidelines of the Record of Decision authorizing the work. However, Stokely emphasized that fishery restoration goals for the Trinity River Restoration Program are not being met while this program continues. A review of DFG data reveals that the goals for naturally spawning fall chinook, spring chinook, fall steelhead and fall coho were not met in 2010. The hatchery count for steelhead was not met either. The goal for fall chinook salmon is 62,000 naturally spawning adult fish and 9,000 adult hatchery fish. The natural spawner count in 2010, 20,876, was 34 percent of the goal. The number of hatchery fall chinooks in 2010, 8,953, was 99 percent of the goal. The adult spring chinook goal is 6,000 natural fish and 3,000 hatchery fish. The natural spring run chinook count for 2010 was 4,477, 75 percent of the goal. The hatchery spring run count was 3,880, 129 percent of the goal. The goal for fall steelhead is 40,000 natural and 10,000 hatchery adults. The natural steelhead count in 2010 was 3,811 fish, 10 percent of the goal. The hatchery steelhead count was 4,640 fish, 46 percent of the goal. The coho salmon goal is 1,400 natural adults and 2,100 hatchery fish. The natural coho count in 2010 was 817, 58 percent of the goal. The hatchery coho count was 5,852, 279 percent of the goal. As of Nov. 12, 4,037 fall and spring run Chinook salmon have been counted in traps at the Trinity River Fish Hatchery, according to the California Department of Fish and Game. A copy of the letter can be found at: http://c-win.org/webfm_send/199 The campaign by the river guides and environmentalists to stop the controversial restoration project takes place as the Brown and Obama administrations are fast-tracking the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build a peripheral canal or tunnel. The purpose of the peripheral canal, referred as ?improved conveyance? by state and federal officials, is to expedite the export of water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and the Trinity River to corporate agribusiness and southern California water agencies. ?The Trinity River is at great risk from increased Delta exports,? said Stokely. ?Anything that reduces pumping restrictions on the Delta adversely impacts the Trinity River by allowing Trinity Lake to be drawn down even more than it is already.? Leonard Masten, chairman of the Hoopa Valley Tribe, on July, 2, 2010 slammed the state-federal peripheral canal plans in a press release that called on the Legislature to repeal the water bond, Proposition 18, rather than to postpone it until 2012. Masten noted that the proposition, known as the Safe, Clean and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act, ?is not really about drinking water.? ?It?s about building and privatizing taxpayer-built dams and moving the control of the California?s water from the public trust to the private sector,? he said. ?The measure also paves the way for the construction of a peripheral canal that would more easily ship Northern California Water south.? Masten said he agreed with the statement by Mark Franco, then headman of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, that ?The peripheral canal is a big, stupid idea that doesn?t make any sense from a tribal environmental perspective. Building a canal to save the Delta is like a doctor inserting an arterial bypass from your shoulder to your hand? it will cause your elbow to die just like taking water out of the Delta through a peripheral canal will cause the Delta to die.? Delta and Trinity River advocates oppose the canal because it will likely result in the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail and green sturgeon, as well as imperiling Trinity River salmon and steelhead runs. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 280px-trinityriverca.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 17488 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Dec 6 08:17:56 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 08:17:56 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update week of November 28 to December 2, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all! Another mid-season update from our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey is available here: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries It was busy last week catching up with some of the reaches we weren't able to survey over Thanksgiving. Our guys mapped 815 redds and almost 1,600 carcasses! Talk to you soon, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Dec 6 10:54:47 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 10:54:47 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Findings of farmer-funded water conservation research criticized Message-ID: <4EDE64F7.9010700@tcrcd.net> Farmer-funded water research criticized OAKLAND December 4, 2011 9:01pm . It used old theories of water-use efficiency, says new study . 'It is time to move away from a focus on practices that only produce 'new' water or new supplies' A paper released in November by Fresno State University's Center for Irrigation Technology and paid for at least in part by Central Valley farmers and the Bureau of Reclamation, is being criticized by scientists on the other side of the water allocation question. The earlier report concluded that farmers have nearly exhausted conservation methods of agricultural use of irrigation water in the Central Valley and only new supplies of water will stave off economic disaster. /(Please see the link at the end of this story for the earlier CVBT article, which includes an audio recording of the study's authors' press conference.)/ But the Fresno State paper "uses old theories of water-use efficiency to argue that the potential to improve efficiency of water use in California agriculture is tiny," says Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute in Oakland, which describes itself as "a nonpartisan research institute that works to advance environmental protection, economic development, and social equity." In a peer-reviewed paper published by the journal Water International, which also published the earlier study, Mr. Gleick, and two colleagues at the institute, Juliet Christian-Smith, senior research associate and Heather Cooley, program co-director, write that "common water conservation practices -- including urban indoor and outdoor efficiency programs, precision irrigation systems, improvements in soil moisture monitoring and management, deficit irrigation, and other approaches -- have enormous potential to conserve water." They criticize the Fresno State paper as pushing a "one-size-fits-all" solution to water management and offering "simplistic, 'universal' answers." The Pacific Institute authors say that water conservation and efficiency practices should be considered along with increased water storage, water recycling, desalination, and other choices to reduce pressures on scarce water supplies. "It is time to move away from a focus on practices that only produce 'new' water or new supplies, on theories that ignore or underestimate co-benefits, and on narrow definitions of conservation and efficiency that misrepresent the potential for improvements in other measures of productivity and environmental sustainability," they write. In a separate column published in the San Francisco Chronicle Sunday, Mr. Gleick says "there is great untapped potential to increase the productivity of California agriculture while reducing water and energy use, reducing serious water-quality contamination in the Central Valley, and increasing the reliability of water supplies during droughts and other water shortages." Copyright ?2011 Central Valley Business Times No content may be reused without written permission. An online unit of BizGnus, Inc. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CVBT200x60.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11782 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 6 14:01:35 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:01:35 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Byron Leydecker's March 21 letter and BOR response Message-ID: <8A120F24-9473-475F-A7F7-7CF9231C54BC@att.net> All, Just to put into context the issue raised in the recent letter by the Trinity River Guides Association and the California Water Impact Network, there was also a letter penned by Byron Leydecker and signed by C-WIN as well as various TAMWG members and me which was sent to the Interior Secretary on March 21 of this year Among other things, that letter asked for a moratorium on mainstem restoration projects pending independent scientific review. A nonresponsive response letter was sent by the Commissioner of Reclamation dated July 29 that completely failed to address the request for a moratorium on mainstem projects. Byron's letter also included a list of documents that Byron had put into a binder for various agencies and people to review the history of the Trinity River Restoration Program and the numerous unanswered recommendations of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group and others. I have included that list below. I also have most of the documents electronically if anybody would like them. I am hopeful that the Trinity River Restoration Program will respond favorably that they intend to comply with the implementation plan for the Trinity River Record of Decision to take a break on implementing new mainstem restoration projects until an independent review has been completed. The language regarding taking a break between Phase 1 and Phase 2 can be found at: Page C-8, Appendix C, Final EIS/EIR for Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration, http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reports/technical/treis/final/appndx_c.pdf Also please note that Byron's letter stated that the Trinity ROD called for construction of three side channels, yet as of that date, eleven had been constructed. In reading the Value Engineering Report for Phase 2 projects, I see that many more side channels are planned for construction. All that is being asked for is to comply with the Trinity River Record of Decision. There remain numerous problems and issues that don't appear to be getting addressed. Respectfully, Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Salazar Letter 3 21 2011.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 55450 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: BOR response to March letter.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 140252 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Salazar Binder Table of Contents.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 24124 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 6 15:50:15 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 15:50:15 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fresno Bee- Wanger cuts legal ties to Westlands Water District Message-ID: This story is an inspiration to all of us who are attempting to influence public opinion through the media. Tom Stokely ******************************************** http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/12/06/2639915/wanger-cuts-legal-ties-to-westlands.html Wanger cuts legal ties to Westlands Water District By John Ellis - The Fresno Bee Tuesday, Dec. 06, 2011 | 02:57 PM Retired federal judge Oliver W. Wanger did an about-face today, deciding not to represent Westlands Water District in a case pending before a state appellate court. A legal brief last week showed Wanger had signed on to represent Westlands in a lawsuit filed against it by several northern California groups. But while Wanger?s expertise on water law was acknowledged, the move also resulted in intense debate about judicial ethics. As a judge, Wanger had presided over dozens of legal disputes involving Westlands ? though the agency lost as many as it won in those cases. Today, Wanger said in an interview that the ethics debate was ?diverting attention away from the merits of the case.? Wanger made it clear the debate had nothing to do with his decision to withdraw from the case. His new firm ? Wanger Jones Helsley ? said in a statement to The Bee that ?recent media comment has raised confusion about the cases upon which former Judge Oliver W. Wanger may work as a private attorney. ?He cannot work on cases involving matters he heard as a judge. The rules do not prevent him from taking cases involving parties who previously appeared before him. No conflict or violation of any rule has occurred.? Tom Birmingham, general manager and counsel for Westlands, said in a statement that the agency ?regrets that we will not have the benefit? of Wanger in the case. ?But we have the highest respect for his integrity and appreciate his strict adherence to the most exacting standards of legal ethics,? the statement said. ?His decision not to proceed with this matter is entirely consistent with the meticulous attention he applied to all aspects of the law during his long career in the federal judiciary.? Birmingham concluded by saying Westlands hopes to work with Wanger in the future. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 7 09:34:10 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 09:34:10 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Taking a break language from Implementation Plan for Trinity ROD Message-ID: <6E94CAFF-9EF4-47DC-860C-14A83C2A0225@att.net> Attached is the language from the Implementation Plan for the Trinity ROD, which is also Appendix C for the Final EIS for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration EIS/EIR, located at http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reports/technical/treis/final/appndx_c.pdf. Given the public controversy over the mainstem projects, the word "may" should be "shall". It only makes sense to take a break if there have been problems and concerns. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org "Twenty-four sites are proposed during the first three years of construction if adequate funding is available. Additional projects will be constructed after evaluation of the first series of projects under Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. This evaluation will be ongoing beginning with construction of the first projects, but an interim period without construction activities may be necessary to fully evaluate the effectiveness of project designs and the effect of the new flow regime before beginning construction on the remaining sites." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: page C-8, Appendix C, Trinity FEIS-R.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 380276 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ema.berol at yahoo.com Wed Dec 7 09:45:24 2011 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emelia Berol) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 09:45:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [env-trinity] Taking a break language from Implementation Plan for Trinity ROD In-Reply-To: <6E94CAFF-9EF4-47DC-860C-14A83C2A0225@att.net> References: <6E94CAFF-9EF4-47DC-860C-14A83C2A0225@att.net> Message-ID: <1323279924.27672.YahooMailNeo@web46213.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Agreed. Emelia ________________________________ From: Tom Stokely To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2011 9:34 AM Subject: [env-trinity] Taking a break language from Implementation Plan for Trinity ROD Attached is the language from the Implementation Plan for the Trinity ROD, which is also Appendix C for the Final EIS for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration EIS/EIR, located at?http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reports/technical/treis/final/appndx_c.pdf.? Given the public controversy over the mainstem projects, the word "may" should be "shall". ?It only makes sense to take a break if there have been problems and concerns. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org "Twenty-four sites are proposed during the first three years of construction if adequate funding is available. Additional projects will be constructed after evaluation of the first series of projects under Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. This evaluation will be ongoing beginning with construction of the first projects, but an interim period without construction activities may be necessary to fully evaluate the effectiveness of project designs and the effect of the new flow regime before beginning construction on the remaining sites." _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 7 11:31:19 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 11:31:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River restoration projects under fire Message-ID: <62573946-D213-4134-9A3C-3C6A149FB17E@att.net> River restoration projects under fire http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-12-07/Front_Page/River_restoration_projects_under_fire.html BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL Two Trinity River restoration projects are slated to go forward in 2012 in spite of concerns raised by an environmental organization and local fishing guides that past projects actually worked against the fish they were intended to help. Work is expected in the coming year on the Upper Junction City and Lower Steiner Flat projects on the river, said Robin Schrock, executive director of the Trinity River Restoration Program. Schrock said she was surprised recently to receive a letter from the Trinity River Guides Association and California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) indicating that the guides? concerns have not been addressed. The letter was a follow-up to a March letter sent by the guides to the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, which advises the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The guides had expected a written response from the TMC, but got none. However, Schrock said the concerns have been taken seriously. ?We have reached out to the guides since July,? said Schrock, who has headed the restoration program since May. ?We found the letter surprising after all the outreach that?s been done.? In one effort resulting from the first letter, Schrock said a liaison to the guides funded by the U.S. Forest Service was appointed. The recent letter to Schrock and Brian Person, chairman of the Trinity Management Council, restates a request that Phase 2 projects on the river be suspended pending a review of the effectiveness of Phase 1 projects. In all, about 47 projects are planned on a 40-mile stretch of the Trinity River, 24 of which have been completed. In past projects, the guides say spawning gravels injected into the river near Lewiston did not disperse as planned and filled holes used by adult salmon. Also, the letter states that many side channels have failed. Schrock said the guides? concerns are being taken into consideration in the redesign of the two projects anticipated to go forward, although she did not have specifics about what changes will be made. Also, she said, ?In September the (Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group) asked that we move forward with projects this year.? The chairman of the advisory group, Arnold Whitridge, put it somewhat differently. ?It?s accurate to say we gave tacit approval because we heard about it and didn?t object,? he said. Some members may have been waiting to see what was proposed to be done in the projects, Whitridge said. He noted that members of the advisory group expect to learn more from restoration program staff at their meeting Friday. Indications from restoration staff are that they are learning from past projects and incorporating the guides? concerns, he said. The Phase 1 review is under way. Schrock said a draft of the review by independent scientists is expected to be completed in July and there will be intermediate recommendations coming out, with a target date of August for the final report to be done. Regarding the side channels, Schrock said although some have not turned out as expected, they can still benefit fish. In nature the channels can close and reopen, she said, and side channels open only at the bottom can still function like an alcove. Amounts of spawning gravel added to the river have been reduced, Schrock said. In their letter to Schrock and Person, sent also to North State members of Congress, guides and C-WIN say they have no option but to ask Congress and the administration to eliminate funding for mainstem projects until a scientific review is completed. ?This is something that?s been brewing for years,? said C-WIN water policy coordinator Tom Stokely, a former Trinity County planner who used to work with the restoration program. Stokely said he has felt for several years that the program has strayed from the Trinity River Record of Decision signed in 2000. The decision increased flows to the river and also called for mechanical restoration projects. Stokely noted that the Record of Decision called for only three side channels, and more have been built. It makes sense to pause now while the review is under way, he said, adding, ?The idea was to learn from the mistakes of the past.? Although a supporter of the program for over 20 years, Stokely said he has no choice now but to protest its direction. ?It?s doing things that may actually be harming the river,? he said. He refers to the letter-writing campaign as ?a last ditch effort to try to save the program? and get it back on track with public support. Public river meetings ?Trinity River Community Conversation? 6 to 7:30 p.m. today, Dec. 7 North Fork Grange Hall on Dutch Creek Road in Junction City. Attendees are asked to discuss their impressions of the current river restoration efforts and share observations about the Trinity River. The meeting is hosted by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, 623-6004, www.tcrcd.net. Light refreshments will be provided. Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Friday, Dec. 9 Trinity County Library in Weaverville Topics include Phase 1 channel rehabilitation projects, 2012 projects, large woody debris and public safety, planning for 2013, etc. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 7 11:32:20 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 11:32:20 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Opinion- Herb Burton- Trinity River restoration moratorium, review essential Message-ID: <6A527A78-F098-41FD-85E4-741CF4A25532@att.net> Trinity River restoration moratorium, review essential http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-12-07/Opinion/Trinity_River_restoration_moratorium_review_essent.html FROM HERB BURTON LEWISTON To precede with more Trinity River restoration projects, without full evaluation of previous projects, makes absolutely no sense and has many questioning the role and integrity of the TRRP. If they are that motivated and blind, willing to jeopardize the ROD and increased water we campaigned so hard to get, then they should consider relocating to Los Angeles and accept the ultimate challenge ? restore the L.A. River. There they can just as easily not follow guidelines, ignore and disdain public input, continue to spend millions on hypothetical guess work, jeopardize fisheries ecosystems, doze banks, dump gravels, pound sand; hey, even reconstruct an entirely new river. Just a thought. I have been blessed to raise a family and live in Trinity County for the past 30 years making a modest living as a full-time fishing guide and owner of a small retail fishing tackle shop. I was fortunate I learned early on the value of our local fisheries and resources and what they truly mean to Trinity County. Straight-up, ?A healthy fishery is a healthy economy.? Not so these days. Some obvious changes and negative impacts have been occurring throughout the upper Trinity River largely as a result of TRRP?s ? learn as we go? restoration projects. Upper river compositions have been drastically altered and currently reflect broad shallow race ways. A far cry from quality habitats and the diversity of water compositions needed to perpetuate and sustain healthy native fish stocks. No more time is critical than now for all Trinity County residents/businesses to come together and fully support the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network?s request for a moratorium on restoration projects and demand that Phase I be fully reviewed and evaluated before any further planned restoration work is to be done. Our river and fisheries need your help, not to mention our future depends on it! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 8 10:41:08 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 10:41:08 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CalTrout on Trinity Message-ID: <503F3564-D824-407B-AD47-39A82BDE997D@att.net> See http://caltrout.org/2011/12/are-steelhead-salmon-returning-to-the-trinity-river/?utm_source=California+Trout+List&utm_campaign=210827c6c5-12_5_2011&utm_medium=email Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Thu Dec 8 13:23:02 2011 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 13:23:02 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CalTrout on Trinity In-Reply-To: <503F3564-D824-407B-AD47-39A82BDE997D@att.net> References: <503F3564-D824-407B-AD47-39A82BDE997D@att.net> Message-ID: <00a801ccb5ef$91677730$b4366590$@suddenlink.net> Darren doesn't mention Seth Naman's HSU MS thesis/ research , that which (if memory serves) suggested that steelhead are residualizing and thriving on hatchery coho. Wouldn't that help explain 'steelhead up; coho down; chinook no progress'? Bill Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 (707) 668-1822 Mobile: 707.498.7847 www.kierassociates.net GSA Contractor GS10F0124U -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 10:41 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] CalTrout on Trinity See http://caltrout.org/2011/12/are-steelhead-salmon-returning-to-the-trinity-ri ver/?utm_source=California+Trout+List&utm_campaign=210827c6c5-12_5_2011&utm_ medium=email Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity From jim at carpenterdesign.com Fri Dec 9 07:34:14 2011 From: jim at carpenterdesign.com (Jim Carpenter) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 07:34:14 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] (no subject) Message-ID: <000901ccb688$0379c060$0a6d4120$@com> Occupy Our Watershed! Enough of agencies, corporations and politicians framing the debate The Klamath's water is ours to Celebrate Not to slice and dice as they adjudicate Water's not a commodity, I'm sorry, it's how we are made A gift from the Creator that animates all life Let's do the earth proud and move beyond strife Wake up to the plunder we do to our mother The water we have shouldn't tear us asunder Get out on the water, drink deep in wonder Look to nature for wisdom of the natural plan How would She deal with the follies of man? Flow on, run free, blow out the damn dam. Jim Carpenter Sailor/Activist Visit our Websites: www.CarpenterDesign.com www.BirdingandBoating.com Phone: 541 885 5450 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Seth.Naman at noaa.gov Fri Dec 9 14:37:35 2011 From: Seth.Naman at noaa.gov (Seth Naman) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 14:37:35 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CalTrout on Trinity In-Reply-To: <00a801ccb5ef$91677730$b4366590$@suddenlink.net> References: <503F3564-D824-407B-AD47-39A82BDE997D@att.net> <00a801ccb5ef$91677730$b4366590$@suddenlink.net> Message-ID: <007601ccb6c3$278e31d0$76aa9570$@noaa.gov> Bill, I would use caution in using the results of my thesis to explain changes in salmonid populations in the Trinity River. It would take a rigorous multi-year analysis to be able to distinguish the mortality from predation by hatchery steelhead from the many other sources of mortality that salmon experience throughout their life and to test if the predation mortality was compensatory or additive. I highly doubt if hatchery steelhead, residualized or not, are thriving on hatchery coho salmon because of the energetic costs associated with prey handling and capture (see the attached paper). It's too costly to chase a hatchery coho salmon smolt and the hatchery steelhead would much prefer sipping fry. Though we did find one or two residualized hatchery steelhead that were capable of making the benefits of chasing hatchery coho salmon smolts outweigh the costs (see the attached picture), but these were rare cases. Seth -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Kier Associates Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 1:23 PM To: 'Tom Stokely'; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] CalTrout on Trinity Darren doesn't mention Seth Naman's HSU MS thesis/ research , that which (if memory serves) suggested that steelhead are residualizing and thriving on hatchery coho. Wouldn't that help explain 'steelhead up; coho down; chinook no progress'? Bill Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 (707) 668-1822 Mobile: 707.498.7847 www.kierassociates.net GSA Contractor GS10F0124U -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 10:41 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] CalTrout on Trinity See http://caltrout.org/2011/12/are-steelhead-salmon-returning-to-the-trinity-ri ver/?utm_source=California+Trout+List&utm_campaign=210827c6c5-12_5_2011&utm_ medium=email Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: residual predator.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 242780 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Naman and Sharpe 2011.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 194675 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 13 08:44:15 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:44:15 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Draft Trinity Management Council Agenda 12/14-15 Message-ID: <98D6A4A2-5CDD-4E2E-83B7-81BCCC2B2638@att.net> Draft Agenda TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL US Forest Service, 3644 Avtech Parkway Redding, CA 96002 Wednesday and Thursday, December 14-15, 2011 Wednesday, December 14, 2011 Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader Regular Business: 12:00 Introductions: Brian Person, Chair - Approval of Agenda - Approval of April and September 2011 Minutes 12:30 Report from TAMWG Chair Arnold Whitridge 1:00 Report from TMC Chair Brian Person CWIN/Guides Letter, Chair and Vice Chair Elections, 1:45 Report from Executive Director Robin Schrock Information / Decision Items: Science Updates 2:15 2012 Projects, 2013 Planning Ernie Clarke 2:45 Sampling Design Workshop Ernie Clarke 3:00 Break 3:15 Adult Review Workshop Joe Polos 3:30 ?Big Questions? for TRRP integration Ernest Clarke 4:00 IDT Update Ernest Clarke 4:30 2012 Calendar Ernest Clarke 5:00 Adjourn 7:00 Offsite Dinner TBD Thursday, December 15, 2011 Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader Implementation Updates 8:30 CWIN/TRGA Recommendations D.J. Bandrowski 9:00 Proposed 2012 Channel Rehabilitation Projects D.J. Bandrowski 9:30 2012 Gravel Augmentation and Revegetation D.J. Bandrowski 10:00 Large Woody Debris and Public Safety D.J. Bandrowski 10:30 Break 10:45 TMC Recommendations/Motion on 2012 Projects TMC Chair 11:30 SAB Phase 1 Scope Review Mike Merigliano 12:30 Lunch 1:30 2012 Watershed: projects/assessment Robin Schrock 1:45 TMC Recommendation/Motion on Watershed Assessment TMC Chair 2:00 Outreach Jeff Morris 2:30 Hatchery Issue ? update on hatchery review Brian Person TMC discussion of TRRP roles/responsibilities Regular Business: 3:00 Open Forum: Comments from the public Brian Person 3:30 Calendars: Confirm next meeting dates and locations Brian Person 4:00 Adjourn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Dec 13 12:40:13 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 12:40:13 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update week of December 5 to 9, 2011 Message-ID: We're nearing the end of our Trinity River spawning survey season. Another update from our survey is available here: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries Redd construction is slowing down. We mapped 377 redds last week and over 1,400 carcasses. Thanks for tuning in! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 13 13:39:35 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:39:35 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Updated TMC agenda Message-ID: <147F62ED-45E3-4A06-88FB-F52EC90DDF1E@att.net> Agenda TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL US Forest Service, 3644 Avtech Parkway Redding, CA 96002 Wednesday and Thursday, December 14-15, 2011 Wednesday, December 14, 2011 Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader Regular Business: 12:00 Introductions: Brian Person, Chair - Approval of Agenda - Approval of April and September 2011 Minutes 12:15 Open Forum: Comments on the agenda Brian Person 12:30 Report from TAMWG Chair Arnold Whitridge 1:00 Report from TMC Chair Brian Person CWIN/Guides Letter, Chair and Vice Chair Elections, Purpose of monthly TMC teleconferences 1:45 Report from Executive Director Robin Schrock Information / Decision Items: Science Updates 2:15 2012 Projects, 2013 Planning Ernie Clarke 2:45 Sampling Design Workshop Ernie Clarke 3:00 Break 3:15 Adult Review Workshop Joe Polos 3:30 ?Big Questions? for TRRP integration Ernest Clarke 4:00 IDT Update Ernest Clarke 4:30 2012 Calendar Ernest Clarke 5:00 Adjourn 7:00 Offsite Dinner TBD Thursday, December 15, 2011 Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader Implementation Updates 8:30 CWIN/TRGA Recommendations D.J. Bandrowski 9:00 Proposed 2012 Channel Rehabilitation Projects D.J. Bandrowski 9:30 2012 Gravel Augmentation and Revegetation D.J. Bandrowski 10:00 Large Woody Debris and Public Safety D.J. Bandrowski 10:30 Break 10:45 TMC Recommendations/Motion on 2012 Projects TMC Chair 11:30 SAB Phase 1 Scope Review Mike Merigliano 12:30 Lunch 1:30 2012 Watershed: projects/assessment Robin Schrock 1:45 TMC Recommendation/Motion on Watershed Assessment TMC Chair 2:00 Outreach Jeff Morris 2:30 Hatchery Issue ? update on hatchery review Brian Person TMC discussion of TRRP roles/responsibilities Regular Business: 3:00 Open Forum: Comments from the public Brian Person 3:30 Calendars: Confirm next meeting dates and locations Brian Person 4:00 Adjourn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrew at wildcalifornia.org Wed Dec 14 09:17:23 2011 From: andrew at wildcalifornia.org (Andrew Orahoske) Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:17:23 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] letter re TRRP actvities from EPIC Message-ID: <000601ccba84$40d23870$c276a950$@org> All, please see attached letter sent today on behalf of EPIC. Andrew J. Orahoske Conservation Director Environmental Protection Information Center 145 G Street, Suite A Arcata, CA 95521 Tel: (707) 822-7711 www.wildcalifornia.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EPIC 12.14.11 letter to TRRP.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 98318 bytes Desc: not available URL: From blancapaloma at msn.com Wed Dec 14 18:40:03 2011 From: blancapaloma at msn.com (Chris Shutes ) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 02:40:03 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] letter re TRRP actvities from EPIC Message-ID: Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Orahoske Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 17:17:23 To: Subject: [env-trinity] letter re TRRP actvities from EPIC All, please see attached letter sent today on behalf of EPIC.? ? ? Andrew J. Orahoske Conservation Director ? Environmental Protection Information Center 145 G Street, Suite A Arcata, CA 95521 Tel: (707) 822-7711 www.wildcalifornia.org ? ? From nada at eelriver.org Thu Dec 15 15:13:22 2011 From: nada at eelriver.org (Nadananda) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 15:13:22 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] env-trinity Digest, Vol 95, Issue 23 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: where is the attached letter? For our National Wild and Scenic Eel River, Nadananda Executive Director Friends of the Eel River 415 332 9810 main office nada at eelriver.org www.eelriver.org 180 Harbor Drive, Suite 104 Sausalito, Ca. 94965 PO Box 2039 Sausalito, CA 94966 On Dec 15, 2011, at 12:00 PM, env-trinity-request at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us wrote: > Send env-trinity mailing list submissions to > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > env-trinity-request at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > > You can reach the person managing the list at > env-trinity-owner at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of env-trinity digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: letter re TRRP actvities from EPIC (Chris Shutes ) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 02:40:03 +0000 > From: "Chris Shutes " > Subject: Re: [env-trinity] letter re TRRP actvities from EPIC > To: "Andrew Orahoske " , > "env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us " > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Orahoske > Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 17:17:23 > To: > Subject: [env-trinity] letter re TRRP actvities from EPIC > > All, please see attached letter sent today on behalf of EPIC.? > ? > ? > Andrew J. Orahoske > Conservation Director > ? > Environmental Protection Information Center > 145 G Street, Suite A > Arcata, CA 95521 > Tel: (707) 822-7711 > www.wildcalifornia.org > ? > ? > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > > End of env-trinity Digest, Vol 95, Issue 23 > ******************************************* > From TWashburn at usbr.gov Thu Dec 15 08:32:30 2011 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:32:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity River Division Message-ID: Beginning on Sunday December 18, 2011, please regulate Whiskeytown elevation operations with Carr and Spring Creek Power Plant. Minimize Carr Diversion. Comment: Trinity Lake storage management Ordered by: Thuy Washburn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Dec 17 12:45:23 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 12:45:23 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Monday meeting at noon on Trinity Mainstem Projects- Trinity Libray Message-ID: <6694ADBA-2C5C-4949-B806-808A8F399DF1@att.net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-12-14/Front_Page/River_stakeholder_meeting_Monday_on_two_projects.html River stakeholder meeting Monday on two projects Stakeholders interested in the Trinity River Restoration Program's planned Upper Junction City and Lower Steiner Flat projects are invited to a technical meeting with project designers on Monday, Dec. 19 at noon at the Weaverville Library. Note: This is just a partial article. Tom Stokely -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Dec 18 06:00:56 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 06:00:56 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Eureka Times Standard-Trinity river advocates campaign to stop restoration projects Message-ID: <0315753E-A25A-4DF6-A67E-C9185AC9FB41@att.net> Trinity river advocates campaign to stop restoration projects; river guides and conservationists want complete review before next project begins Donna Tam/The Times-Standard Posted: 12/18/2011 02:07:57 AM PST Click photo to enlarge http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_19573579 Trinity River guide Travis Michel needs the Trinity to be healthy for him to stay financially afloat. A former building contractor who found himself at the mercy of a poor housing market, Michel's dependence on the river is shared by all people who work and live along the Trinity. ?Fishing is what keeps Trinity County alive these days,? Michel wrote in an email to the Times-Standard. ?It used to be timber and mining, but those days are gone. When there are fish in the river, all the guides are busy as well as all the hotels and restaurants.? Although he supports restoration in concept, Michel, along with other river guides and conservationists, has recently come out against the work of the Trinity River Restoration Program, or TRRP. The program is set up to carry out a series of restoration projects aiming to mange water flows, construct channel rehabilitation sites, add gravel to encourage fish spawning and control fine sediments. Half of the 47 projects are completed. The Trinity River Guides Association and the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) have said the program is doing more harm than good and is moving forward on the second phase of projects before the first phase has been properly evaluated. A study on the effects of the first phase is expected this spring. The Trinity Management Council, or TMC, voted at its meeting last week to continue the design work on two restoration projects scheduled for 2012 but with the direction that staff meet with stakeholders, such as the guides association and C-WIN, to discuss their concerns, according to TMC Chair Brian Person. The TMC will make a decision on the projects at its meeting on Jan. 4. Person said concerns brought up by the guides and C-WIN were taken into consideration by program staff in the past, and adjustments to designs were made based on their feedback. ?What we learned is they made some steps in the right direction, just not enough,? Person said of the discussion at the TMC meeting. In November, the guides and C-WIN sent a letter to the program strongly objecting to both the design and construction of projects prior to the completion of the first phase's review. The letter followed up a letter sent in March that the program has yet to address. Robin Schrock, executive director for the Trinity River Restoration Program, said she was not executive director in March and could not speak to the letter sent then, but she is working on a response to the November letter. Michel, who also signed the letter, said guides are concerned, considering the results so far. The gravel injections have filled in adult holding pools, making fishing the river unattractive for sports fishermen, according to Michel, who has been a guide for six years and spends about 250 days on the river. ?The whole process bothers us,? he wrote in an email to the Times-Standard sent before the Trinity Management Council meeting. ?It seems we have been told by members of TRRP that they get a certain amount of money every year, and if they don't use it they will lose it. It is clear to us that they are trying to keep the ball rolling so they don't lose their money without properly thinking these projects out or checking with all the stakeholders to see how they will be affected.? Tom Stokely, of the California Water Impact Network, estimated that 20 major holding pools between Lewiston and Douglas City have been filled with gravel, which aims to provide an environment for fish to spawn. ?We think that's pretty important habitat for adult fish,? he said. Not all the gravel filling fishing holes is from the program's actions, Schrock said, citing the piles of gravel left over from historic mining operations that line the banks. She said the unusually high amount of water this year may also be a factor. ?Gravel augmentation is part of restoration, so some of the holes did receive the gravel, but this is an exceptionally wet year ... the designers are taking it into consideration,? she said. Implementation of the projects costs about $4 million a year, according to Schrock. It includes the replacement of wells and bridges along the river and funds a well grant program. Stokely said moving forward before completing a review is poor planning and a possible waste of resources. ?They are not doing what they said they would do,? he said. ?They are also not gaining wisdom from the very expensive review they are doing.? The bottom line for both groups is the program's lack of communication and oversight, Stokely said. Schrock said she is confused by the guides' comments, since the entire program has been under ?pretty rigorous? peer review, and changes to designs have been made as a result of prior concerns voiced by the guides. The program also has an assigned liaison who has met with guides throughout the year. She said the review will help fine-tune future projects. The concerns of the river guides and C-WIN may spur Congressman Wally Herger, R-Chico, to send a request for a formal review from the U.S. Department of the Interior, according to Herger's communications director, Bryan Cleveland. ?He believes it's important to the interior department and groups like this to listen to the concerns of the guides,? Cleveland said. Person said the management council is listening. ?In retrospect, we should have provided an interim response,? he said, referencing the unanswered letters. ?But there has been a continued dialogue in the eight-month period.? He's hoping that by the council's Jan. 4 meeting the gap between what the guides and C-WIN want and what the program can do will shrink enough to satisfy everyone's concerns. But if the discussions begin to hinder the program's objectives, the council will have to move forward. ?I'm hoping that's not the outcome; I'm hopeful for a positive Donna Tam can be reached at 441-0532 or dtam at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20111218__local_trinity_VIEWER.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8361 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Dec 18 06:06:33 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 06:06:33 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Radio Interviews with Tom Stokely and Brian Person- myoutdoorbuddy.com Message-ID: <243296C9-A058-45CF-8E18-D0BB2FC9112E@att.net> All, Frank Galusha of My Outdoor Buddy interviewed me and Brian Person regarding the current Trinity River controversy on his weekly radio show that airs from 6-7 am Saturdays on KNCR 1460 AM from Redding. You can also pick up his show at http://myoutdoorbuddy.com Just go to the red button in the upper left portion of the web page that says "Listen to the Show". Then push the blue button in the upper left portion of that next page that says "Listen to the show". Thanks Frank! Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 19 21:00:49 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 21:00:49 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River hatchery totals through week of dec. 16 References: <4EEB17C6.1B1D.0039.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: <961B2139-CABC-48CE-8B53-22D5A9B0FC50@att.net> From: Wade Sinnen Date: December 16, 2011 10:05:56 AM PST To: Curtis Milliron Subject: Trinity River hatchery totals through week of dec. 16 Folks, We have finally caught up to the data at Trinity River hatchery for the season. The attached spreadsheet contain the latest data. The chinook run into the hatchery has waned and coho will continue to straggle in. Steelhead numbers have really picked up. Both spring and fall Chinook counts were up this year at TRH as compared to last and this upward trend also seams to reflected throughout the Klamath-Trinity basin natural spawning areas., based on preliminary observations. If you have any questions, feel free to give me a shout. Happy Holidays! Wade Wade Sinnen Senior Environmental Scientist Klamath/Trinity Program CA Dept. of Fish and Game Northern District 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-5119 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 86016 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 20 11:40:01 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:40:01 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Two River Tribune Report on Hoopa Tribal Council actions and Fish Disaster Relief Funds Message-ID: All, The first article appears to be from September, but I thought it would be of great interest to all of you. The second article is from December. I couldn't seem to cut and paste just the text, so you get the full web pages below. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/09/new-option-for-salmon-aid-money-fish-weir-or-paycheck-to-fishermen/ Home Contact Us About Us Advertising Privacy Policy Register Arts & Culture? Classifieds? Community? Editorials? Entertainment? Environment? K-T's Most Wanted Local News? New Option for Salmon Aid Money, Fish Weir or Paycheck to Fishermen The Hoopa Valley Tribal Council held a public hearing last Wednesday to discuss alternative ways to spend salmon disaster relief aid that has been sitting idle since 2007. The original spending plan included building and improving five roads into the Hoopa gorge area of the Trinity River, but that plan was stricken last month by the Tribal Council. An alternative will be discussed at the Tribe?s Sept.15, regularly scheduled meeting. / TRT file photo. Public Hearing Results in Demand for Immediate Action By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune The Hoopa Valley Tribal (HVT) Council held a public hearing last Wednesday evening to hear the tribal membership?s ideas on how to spend $228,000 remaining from salmon disaster relief aid granted back in 2007. The tribe has until July 31, 2012 to complete a yet-to-be determined project or the funds will be permanently lost. Originally, the HVT Council approved a spending plan that included the distribution of gill nets, the purchase of an ice machine and ice chests for tribal members. That spending plan also included a quarter million to build or improve five river access roads in the gorge area of the reservation. After the latter was completed, public opposition to the river access roads portion of the project prompted the HVT Council to revisit the plan, this time with public input. The meeting got off to a slow start at 6pm. Council member Hayley Hutt was present along with about a dozen tribal members. She stalled the meeting waiting for more council members to arrive. Shortly thereafter, council members Augustine Montgomery and Byron Nelson arrived. No other council members were present. HVT Vice Chairman, Byron Nelson asked the Fisheries Department Director if an extension of the grant period is possible. Some attendees supported an extension and others opposed stating that the money needs to be spent soon and on what it was originally intended for?disaster relief. ?The Fisheries Department provided the Council with a list of projects when the grant was awarded?the main objective of the council at that time was to increase the tribal harvest of Chinook salmon,? Orcutt said. ?Now we?ve been asked to come up with a range of alternatives,? Orcutt provided a 10-page packet that listed six different alternatives; the construction of a fish processing facility; improvement of existing river access roads in the Hoopa Valley; ice machine operation and maintenance; the construction of a fish dam; contracting with under-employed fishermen to provide fish for elders and the tribal membership; and individual cash payment to the membership. Tribal member Lois Risling thanked Orcutt for providing the memo, but complained that it lacked budget information. ?I?m being asked to come here and comment on these,? Risling said ?But, I need to have costs associated with each item to make these sorts of decisions? The memo provides minimal financial information for one of the proposed projects?the fish weir, not to be confused with the traditional fish dam. Hoopa Tribal Self Governance Coordinator, Danny Jordan estimated the cost of a modern, metal fish weir to be about $134,602. He based that number on the cost the California Department of Fish and Game paid for a weir back in 1987 and applied the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation rate. Risling complained that using an inflation calculator wasn?t the appropriate way to estimate weir costs. Subsequent research reveals that the current cost of a 12-foot section of a weir is about $1,000. That would make a 250 foot section of the river approximately $20,000 to weir, plus the cost of catch boxes and a gate to allow navigation. Cost estimates vary by source and product. Mary Jane Risling commented that there were two alternatives not included in the memo. She urged the Council to use some of the allocated funds to investigate and research traditional regulatory measures regarding fishing. She also urged the Council to revisit the earlier projects (net distribution, ice chests etc.) to gage the progress made toward the ultimate goal of harvesting more Chinook salmon. Tribal member Kenny Norton voiced his support for a fish dam or weir. Norton said he?s confident that community members would volunteer to work the weir and that he, himself would volunteer as well. He also said that a weir would allow the tribe to selectively harvest the fish they want, releasing endangered coho or certain ages or sizes of Chinook salmon. Most of the comments supported the construction of a fish dam or weir, except those of Norvin Hostler. Hostler said the weir is a good idea, while at the same time he urged the Council to revisit the intention of the grant. ?What?s our definition of disaster relief?,? he said. ?We?re still sitting here pushing this ?how to catch our quota? agenda when what we need to look at is who suffered the disaster. Who does this funding really belong to? We need to identify the fishermen that suffered from the disaster and relieve them. That?s what this money was for. And, that?s how it benefited ocean fishermen and the Yurok Tribe. He added that the money should have been spent back in 2007 when it became available. He urged the council to hurry and act before the money is lost for good. Hoopa Tribal member Steve Baldy stepped up the podium and asked about the possibilities of a functioning fish dam or weir this late in the season. ?Can we do a fish dam now? Or, next year after the July deadline?,? he asked. ?It seems like if we want to move with that project we?d be forced to get an extension. We should start eliminating certain alternatives if we want to do them this year.? Local fisherman, Stanley Ferris, Jr. told the Council that the fishing disaster devastated his famly, whom rely heavily on fishing to barter for other goods and services. ?The Yurok Tribe cut their fishermen checks. When farmers lose their crops, the government gives them a subsidy so they don?t abandon their businesses. This is really no different,? Ferris said. ?To this day the individual Hupa fisherman hasn?t been compensated, yet the Tribe was given money on our behalf back in 2007.? The Tribe will continue the discussion about how to spend the money at their Thursday, Sept. 15 regularly scheduled meeting. Hostler added a final comment at the end of the hearing, ?If I were sitting at the leadership table I would ask myself, ?Are the people who are actually affected by the disaster seeing the money??? The Federal appropriation of $60.4 million was shared between the commercial salmon industries in California, Oregon and the Indian Tribes that rely upon the salmon fishery for their subsidence and cultural heritage. The Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission located in Portland, Oregon coordinated tri-lateral relief effort with the Federal government and in particular the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the California Salmon Council, the Oregon Salmon Commission and the Hoopa and Yurok tribes. Congressman Mike Thompson sponsored the bill in cooperation with other California and Oregon legislators. The appropriations bill was signed by President George Bush in May of 2007 when it was included in the military spending package. The grant was awarded in 2007 by an act of congress. A total of $60 million was made available to fishermen in California and Oregon. ### shareshare Post Metadata Date September 15th, 2011 Category Environment, Local News Tags Hoopa Gorge, Hoopa Valley Tribe Trackback URI Comments RSS Leave a Reply Name (required) Mail (will not be published) (required) Website Popular Articles Man on the Run Chairman Shuts Down Newspaper Day Before New Council Sworn In Cultural Controversy in Orleans Shooting Bigfoot with Film not Bullets Debate About Growing Pot on Reservation Continues Most Commented Articles Man on the Run {36} Opinions (Mike Lee Sr.-Hoopa, Calif.) {15} Cultural Controversy in Orleans {13} Tish Tang Falls Article Has Hoopa Tribal Members Worried {10} The Fabric of Life {8} TWO RIVERS TRIBUNE ~ ONLINE ? All Rights Reserved. http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/12/hoopa-tribal-council-approves-project-for-hsu-student-passes-resolution-on-irrigation-project/ Home Contact Us About Us Advertising Privacy Policy Register Arts & Culture? Classifieds? Community? Editorials? Entertainment? Environment? K-T's Most Wanted Local News? Hoopa Tribal Council Approves Project for HSU Student, Passes Resolution on Irrigation Project Regular Meeting Held Monday By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune Once again the regularly scheduled Hoopa Valley Tribal Council meeting was rescheduled. It was held Monday, Dec.5 at 1:30pm. The agenda made available to the public was not the agenda used by the council during the meeting. Additions were made to the executive session portion of the agenda that included an enrollment issue; a debt collection issue; a private discussion with Jacqueline Alford; and discussion on Klamath legislation. Continuing business included a motion to approve of the Decision Notice for Adoption of Alternative 2011-2025 Forest Management Plan Environmental Assessment. The motion passed. A discussion that ended in a motion was held with Hoopa Tribal member Lori Biondini. Biondini is a master?s degree candidate at Humboldt State University who is interested in helping the tribe develop a salmon harvest plan as part to meets the goals and objectives addressed by the tribe in a series of public hearings held in summer of 2011. Councilmember Joseph LeMieux is supportive of the idea that was brought to the table by Vice Chairman, Byron Nelson. ?I have no objections to giving you a project to do at school,? he said. ?But I would like to see some parameters on what it will consist of.? Biondini assured the council that the project focus would be driven by the interests of the tribe. Nelson said Biondini?s work will provide the framework for a plan that will help the tribe harvest its full allocation of fall run Chinook salmon, a goal heavily discussed over the course of several public hearings held in the wake of the tribe?s referendum vote to ban commercial fishing. ?I don?t think we can depend on the Fisheries Department,? he said. ?We?ve got to develop a program to harvest fish.? Biondini said she will be able to devote about 25 hours per week to the project on a voluntary basis. No timeline for completion has yet been set, but Biondini?s term is set to end in June of 2012. Her master?s degree will be in environment and community, arts and social sciences. The council voted to allow Biondini to begin the project and meet with her in upcoming working sessions. A motion to approve a payment of $24,567 to Thomas Peterson was next up on the agenda. Peterson currently represents the Hoopa Tribe in their suit against former Chairman Clifford Lyle Marshall for severance pay Marshall received near the end of his term as chairman in 2009. LeMieux asked if the issue of damages in the case against Marshall had been settled. Chairman, Leonard Masten Jr., replied saying that they are currently working on that portion of the case. In the new business portion of the meeting, several motions were made to approve Hoopa Tribal Fisheries Department spending on a Trinity River Hatchery survey being conducted by Humboldt State University; legal services rendered by Joseph Membrino at Hall Estill for the month of October amounting to $11,979.50. A motion was also made to approve the receipt of $175,000 as part of an Annual Funding Agreement with the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration for salmon recovery projects. A motion was made to accept a grant from the Department of Health and Human Services to administer the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) to Hoopa Tribal members. The grant amount is $46,080. Councilmember Ryan Jackson asked the Director of the Tribe?s Human Services, Millie Grant, if the program was also open to non-tribal members. She said it was not. Jackson suspects that non tribal members have received assistance through LIHEAP and asked for a list of program recipients over the past several cycles. Grant said that to provide a list of recipients would violate client rights to confidentiality. The council voted to accept the funding and also agreed to support a process to ensure only tribal members receive help through the program. Ken Norton, Director of the Tribe?s Environmental Protection Agency (TEPA) was on the agenda for approval to travel to Tulsa, Okla. for a National Tribal Caucus meeting, however he said he canceled his trip and chose to participate in the meeting via conference call. Several small budget modifications were made by Norton to close out funds from fiscal year 2011. The Tribe?s Head Start program also had a similar budget closeout item. The Tribal Employment Rights Office (TERO) was added to the agenda seeking approval to sign a special MOU with CalTrans. The MOU will allow CalTrans to include the Tribe?s TERO requirements in a contract bid package currently being prepared to begin work on the Trinity River bridge in downtown Hoopa. The bridge rehabilitation project will consist of a 1 inch thick polyester coating on the entire bridge to prolong its life. The Tribe?s Public Utilities District (PUD) asked for a resolution that provides access to fee property by the tribe to complete phase one of the valley-wide irrigation property. PUD director, Barbara Ferris said that the project is currently at a standstill because of access issues. A resolution was approved and work should resume soon. The final agenda item was to approve a cash reward for information leading to the arrest of Robert ?Brooder? Mabry. Mabry is suspected of several burglaries in and around the Klamath-Trinity region and has evaded arrest on several occasions. A motion was passed and the reward notice went public on Dec. 6. The following day, Mabry was apprehended by Hoopa Valley Tribal Police. The next regularly scheduled Council meeting will be held on Thursday, Dec. 15 at 1:30pm in the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council Chambers. ### shareshare Post Metadata Date December 13th, 2011 Category Hoopa, Local News Tags Hoopa Tribal Council Meeting Trackback URI Comments RSS Leave a Reply Name (required) Mail (will not be published) (required) Website Popular Articles Man on the Run Chairman Shuts Down Newspaper Day Before New Council Sworn In Cultural Controversy in Orleans Shooting Bigfoot with Film not Bullets Debate About Growing Pot on Reservation Continues Most Commented Articles Man on the Run {36} Opinions (Mike Lee Sr.-Hoopa, Calif.) {15} Cultural Controversy in Orleans {13} Tish Tang Falls Article Has Hoopa Tribal Members Worried {10} The Fabric of Life {8} TWO RIVERS TRIBUNE ~ ONLINE ? All Rights Reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: masthead.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16823 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GRRS-Adoption-Option-Banner.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 29387 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1737gorgeroads1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 49045 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1750holidaygreeting1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 595077 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: default-125.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6311 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1641BCS.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16206 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: bluebutton.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 25735 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1745keepseaglead.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 44895 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: g.gif Type: image/gif Size: 50 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: masthead.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16823 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GRRS-Adoption-Option-Banner.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 29387 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: bluebutton.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 25735 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: XontahSMBlock.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 24830 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: default-125.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6311 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1750holidaygreeting1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 595077 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1745keepseaglead.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 44895 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: g.gif Type: image/gif Size: 50 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 21 09:10:58 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:10:58 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Trinity River Restoration Program and Trinity River Guides Find Common Ground Message-ID: <8C898E65-6B6E-46BD-B9B5-90ADEA80EDFE@att.net> TRRP, guides find common ground http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-12-21/Front_Page/TRRP_guides_find_common_ground.html BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL There was a meeting of the minds Monday between design staff for Trinity River Restoration Program projects and fishing guides who raised concerns about those projects. Fishing guide Travis Michel said he came out of the meeting optimistic. ?We did come up with an agreement on the 2012 projects,? he said, ?and our concerns were addressed by the Trinity River restoration design team.? Any changes to the planned Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City projects still need to be approved by the Trinity Management Council which meets Jan. 4 in Weaverville. However, restoration program staff plan to redesign the projects so that smaller gravel is not used. Larger rock that is less likely to be carried downstream will be used to create habitat ? a skeletal bar at Lower Steiner Flat and an island-like feature with vegetation at Upper Junction City. The Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network had called for a moratorium on mainstem Trinity River projects until a review of earlier projects is completed. In a widely distributed letter, they said that gravel injected at project sites has filled in deep pools used by adult fish. Michel said although the guides are not calling for a moratorium at this point, some remain leery of working with the program. He said he still is disappointed in the lengths the guides had to go to in order to be heard. However, the project designers have agreed to avoid changes to sensitive sites identified by the guides, and ?they?ve also decided not to design any more projects until the review is done,? Michel said, ?which was kind of the pause we were looking for in a way.? From the Trinity Management Council, Chairman Brian Person (also area manager for the federal Bureau of Reclamation) said he will still respond in writing to the letter from the guides and C-WIN, as well as a more recent letter from the Environmental Protection Information Center expressing concerns that injected gravel may have filled pools used by coho salmon. Person called Monday?s meeting an effective exchange of information, adding that the design team explained why certain features of the projects are important, and the guides explained their concerns with use of gravel. ?The design team was responsive to the guides in modifying the designs,? he said. In another of the guides? concerns, Person said the Trinity Management Council will consider going back to remediate earlier project sites that are not performing as designed if necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 21 11:09:31 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 11:09:31 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Oregonian: Hatchery fish quick to hurt reproduction in wild References: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F72988D62CEB@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> Message-ID: Hatchery fish quick to hurt reproduction in wild Dec. 20, 2011, 6:30 p.m. PST The Oregonian http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf/story/hatchery-fish-quick-to-hurt-reproduction-in/5dba5bd56a264104a89a1c17e9e9388d PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) ? Oregon State University scientists have found that it takes only a single generation for steelhead trout raised in fish hatcheries to pass along bad genetic traits to populations in the wild. The findings are the latest in a growing body of evidence showing the downside to hatcheries as a way to rebuild threatened and endangered salmon and steelhead runs. Studies of Hood River steelhead had previously pinpointed declining reproduction success by hatchery fish in the wild, but the latest research shows it is a result of domestication of young fish in hatcheries that can be transmitted in breeding with wild fish, not from a temporary environmental effect, said Mark Christie, a genetic researcher and the study's lead author. "Now we know definitely that it's adaptation to captivity and it happens in a single generation, which is amazing from an evolutionary standpoint," Christie told The Oregonian newspaper (http://bit.ly/uaaPYf). The findings, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, raise concern about programs to supplement wild populations of salmon and steelhead by releasing young hatchery fish near spawning grounds, the paper reported. Unlike conventional hatcheries, supplementation programs try to integrate the hatchery populations into wild populations, many protected under the Endangered Species Act. Supporters of hatchery supplementation programs caution against concluding that supplementation is bad. Tribes use it to help fulfill government promises to sustain tribal fisheries after Columbia Basin dams were built and in treaties signed in the mid-1800s. The productivity declines in Hood River steelhead are among the sharpest of many salmon and steelhead runs studied. And damage from dams and habitat destruction likely have bigger effects on productivity and returns, hatchery supporters say. "It's important to remember that hatchery supplementation is a response to declining or depressed salmon populations, not the cause," said Peter Galbreath, a fishery scientist with the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission. Supplementation is necessary "to rebuild populations at desired levels while we await, probably naively, rectification of the source problems," he said. The tribes say they can manage hatcheries to reduce domestication problems, and have advocated doing so for two decades. Recent successes with Snake River fall chinook indicate carefully run programs can boost numbers of wild fish, they say. Oregon State Professor Michael Blouin, who participated in the study, said it should lead scientists to focus on what's going wrong in hatcheries. If crowded tanks prove to be a key problem, for example, hatcheries could reduce fish numbers or build more tanks, he said. "In my opinion, the question of whether genetic change occurs in hatcheries has been answered," Blouin said. "If we could quit arguing about that and find out why, then we're all on the same team again." ___ Information from: The Oregonian, http://www.oregonlive.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Wed Dec 21 12:39:27 2011 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 12:39:27 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey -update December 12 to 20, 2011 Message-ID: Hi all, Thank you for tuning in this fall. We've reached the end of our Fall 2011 Trinity River spawning survey season. Our final 2011 update is available here: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries Numbers will adjust slightly as our data undergo some QA/QC but preliminarily our crews mapped 6,763 mainstem Trinity River salmon redds! Wishing you all a fantastic 2012, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 21 13:37:53 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:37:53 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal (12/14/11)-River fans air concerns Message-ID: <8C7B40C4-9AB1-49D4-B3B8-6C42DEF040A8@att.net> Please note that this article is a week old. River fans air concerns http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-12-14/Front_Page/River_fans_air_concerns.html Meeting held as public outreach BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL Gene Goodyear points out a restoration project along the Trinity River at Reading Creek that has affected his family?s property. Restoration Program Executive Director Robin Schrock declined to comment specifically on the Reading Creek project but said, ?I do want to reiterate the goal of the program through the ( Trinity River Record of Decision) is to return natural river processes to the Trinity River.? PHIL NELSON | THE TRINITY JOURNAL Complaints about Trinity River Restoration Program projects were aired at a forum last week in Junction City. Many said deep pools used by adult fish have been filled in with spawning gravel, and injection of woody debris for habitat is hazardous to people recreating on the river. Others asked about the cost. Some said the work is just plain ugly. About 25 people attended the Dec. 7 meeting at the North Fork Grange Hall put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and consultant Jeff Morris. Noting that the Resource Conservation District is not the decision making entity for the restoration program, the three said their job is to bring the questions and concerns to the entities involved. The public outreach meeting follows a letter from the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network to the restoration program?s director and others seeking a moratorium on the second phase of channel restoration projects until a review of the first phase is complete. The Trinity River Record of Decision signed by former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt in 2000 called for higher flows and channel manipulation projects to restore the Trinity River. The channel projects received plenty of criticism at last week?s meeting. ?I want to know how much has been spent on this,? said Dan Morrison of Junction City. Morrison said he has lived in the area since 1983, and older restoration sites have become completely overgrown. ?How can they assess them if they don?t maintain them?? he asked. Fishing guide Travis Michel noted that projects in the Lewiston area have made the river shallow and gravel-filled. ?There?s nowhere to fish up there anymore, especially if you?re a fly fisherman,? he said. While noting that gravel is good for spawning salmon, he said holding areas for adult fish need to be evaluated as well. The river guides have said spawning gravel added to project sites has filled in holes adult fish use. Before projects, ?I think they need to evaluate the values of a stretch of river that are already there,? Michel said. ?We asked seven years ago that they put part of the budget in to dredge out the holes,? said Vince Holson, another fishing guide. Property owners also spoke up. Gene Goodyear said a project across the Trinity River from property his family owns in the Reading Creek area has caused problems. Gravel injected at the site filled a hole used by fish and redirected the Trinity River so that it is eroding the Goodyear property, he said. Goodyear added that his family had expressed concerns before the project, and ?they blew us off.? ?We had like a month to sift through two years of their work,? he said. ?To me that?s unacceptable.? Mike Hopko, who fishes on the river, said the projects are ugly. ?It?s not pretty floating down, that?s for sure,? he said. Goodyear noted that vegetation did not line the river as it does now before the dam was built, but Hopko said, ?It?s never going to be like that again.? Concerns were also expressed about projects to put woody debris in the river. ?Who?s responsible for safety issues on the river from the work you are doing?? Holson asked. Hopko noted that the salmon life cycle is three to four years and some projects were recently completed, so it is early to finish an evaluation. ?We need to stop and wait and see what happens,? he said. ?I think we have a perfect opportunity,? Michel said. ?The project?s half done. Go work on the watersheds.? Michel also asked if the public will have the opportunity to comment on the two projects planned for 2012. County Sup. Debra Chapman said the program needs to put out information on the outcomes of its efforts. ?Put it in layman?s terms,? pitched in fishing guide Ed Duggan, a member of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group which advises the Trinity Management Council. A former member of the advisory group, Tom Weseloh, said the group has asked many of the questions brought up at the meeting and has been ignored. He suggested that concerned citizens also go to the Trinity Management Council meetings. ?If you don?t say it they?re going to think everything?s going great,? he said. In response to a comment that the only ones happy with the program are those making money off it, Weseloh noted that residents along the river did appreciate the project to replace bridges and other structures that prevented higher flows. Resource Conservation District staff said they would take the group?s concerns and questions to the advisory group as well as the Trinity Management Council itself. The advisory group met last Friday in Weaverville, and the management council meets this Wednesday and Thursday, Dec. 14 and 15, in Redding. ?We?re going to get written answers to all of these,? said Jeff Morris, a consultant for the Resource Conservation District. More meetings to gather public input are to be scheduled in communities along the river. Trinity Management Council Meets at noon today, Dec. 14, and 8:30 a m. Thursday, Dec. 15. U.S. Forest Service offices at 3644 Avtech Parkway in Redding Meetings are open to the public. An open forum for comments on agenda items is scheduled for 12:15 p m. Wednesday. An open forum for comments from the public isscheduledfor3pm.Thursday. Topics include: Letter from Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network, 2012 projects and 2013 planning, 2012 gravel augmentation and revegetation, large woody debris and public safety, 2012 watershed projects, public outreach, update on Trinity River Hatchery review. . . . The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group on Friday voted to recommend to the Trinity Management Council that some projects go forward, though scaled-back after a neeting with stakeholders. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2p1.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11499 bytes Desc: not available URL: From summerhillfarmpv at aol.com Mon Dec 26 00:46:18 2011 From: summerhillfarmpv at aol.com (summerhillfarmpv at aol.com) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 03:46:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] (no subject) Message-ID: <8CE91C1F8476253-2710-3D2B@webmail-d145.sysops.aol.com> What do you think about it? http://www.maricom.pl/foldephp1342/christmas-index.php?yqevlistid=25 Mon, 26 Dec 2011 9:46:18 __________________ "But I think seeing that barn burning down made me feel worse than the whipping,--though I felt I deserved that, too.The Edisons moved to Port Huron, Michigan, and lived a little way out of the town on the St." (c) MICHAL wagsau From summerhillfarmpv at aol.com Mon Dec 26 00:46:18 2011 From: summerhillfarmpv at aol.com (summerhillfarmpv at aol.com) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 03:46:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] (no subject) Message-ID: <8CE91C1F8476253-2710-3D2B@webmail-d145.sysops.aol.com> What do you think about it? http://www.maricom.pl/foldephp1342/christmas-index.php?yqevlistid=25 Mon, 26 Dec 2011 9:46:18 __________________ "But I think seeing that barn burning down made me feel worse than the whipping,--though I felt I deserved that, too.The Edisons moved to Port Huron, Michigan, and lived a little way out of the town on the St." (c) MICHAL wagsau From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 26 09:01:23 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 09:01:23 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Don't open web link sent by summerhillfarmpv@aol.com!! Message-ID: All, Please don't' open the web links sent by summerhillfarmpv at aol.com. They look suspicious and I suspect that the sender has a virus. I am disabling his address from posting to the env-trinity list server until he gets it cleared up. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Dec 27 13:03:11 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 13:03:11 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle: No public discussion on Feinstein's slick maneuver to streamline transfer of northern California water to southern Callifornia Message-ID: <4EFA328F.8090002@tcrcd.net> Feinstein's slick maneuver to move water around Tuesday, December 27, 2011 Just two sentences, dropped into a 1,221-page, $915 billion omnibus spending bill, have streamlined the controversial practice of selling water from north of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to farms and cities south of the delta. This little provision merited more scrutiny and debate than it received. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., inserted the language into the bill, a complex document that authorized the spending needed to keep the government in business through September that President Obama signed into law Dec. 17, to provide more flexibility in moving water around the Central Valley - something she has sought for several years. The first sentence eases water transfers from irrigation districts served by the federal Central Valley Project, including the Westlands Water District and the privately owned Kern Water Bank. The second sentence mandates a study to streamline water sales, both among south-of-the-delta water contractors and north-south transfers. State law has been moving for the past decade toward water markets as a way to distribute more equitably the state's most precious resource. The transfers are in keeping with that policy. The rules matter because if they could ease the transfer of "paper water" - water a district has contracts for but doesn't actually have - it could increase the overall amount of water exported. That water would have to come from someone else; that could be bad for fish, farmers or San Francisco Bay. Those concerned about the state's salmon and trout fisheries fear more flexibility to transfer water will reduce the Sacramento River to the same state as the San Joaquin River - but a trickle of its former flows. They want greater protections for the fish. The delta ecosystem is already declining as pumping has increased. At the same time, Bay Area water districts rely on the ability to move water to supplement their own supplies. It's too easy to characterize water conflicts as a north-south or fish-versus-farmers or greedy-private-water-contractors debates. An earlier law that allowed water transfers for a year has expired. How well did that work? What does the federal government get out of agreeing to deliver another 80,000-acre-feet of subsidized water? We don't know, because this tiny rider to an omnibus bill wasn't discussed in public as it should be. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/27/ED7R1MGG4Q.DTL This article appeared on page *A - 11* of the San Francisco Chronicle ? 2011 Hearst Communications Inc. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Dec 27 13:11:33 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 13:11:33 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Article: New CDFG boss Bonham has tough balancing act Message-ID: <4EFA3485.9040504@tcrcd.net> Four-page article on Chuck Bonham: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/dec/23/new-boss-california-fish-and-game-has-tough-balanc/?page=1#article From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Dec 27 13:17:21 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 13:17:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily: Scott River Coho returns higher Message-ID: <4EFA35E1.6040501@tcrcd.net> http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1980198181/Scott-River-coho-return-substantially-higher-than-expected From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 28 11:22:23 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 11:22:23 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Trinity River Project trapping through 24 Dec 2011 References: <4EFAF393.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: From: Mary Claire Kier Date: December 28, 2011 10:47:51 AM PST To: Mary Claire Kier Subject: Trinity River Project trapping through 24 Dec 2011 Greetings! Attached please find the latest trapping data from the Trinity River Hatchery. Wade has passed his distribution list to me (as he has answered the call up to Senior Supervisor of the Klamath/Trinity Program) so your weekly summaries will come from a slightly different email address, but hopefully will continue to arrive in their customary timely manner. Let me know if you have questions or concerns. Mary Claire Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 89088 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Thu Dec 29 16:26:28 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 16:26:28 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Management Council public meeting January 4 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. in TPUD conference room, Weaverville Message-ID: <4EFD0534.9000504@tcrcd.net> Public Meeting of the Trinity Management Council Regarding the Trinity River Restoration Program When: Wednesday, January 4th 9:30 am - 4:30 pm Where: TPUD Conference Room 26 Ponderosa Lane, Weaverville Why You Should Attend: The Trinity Management Council, in its role as the Board of Directors for the Trinity River Restoration Program, will discuss upcoming 2012 restoration projects and potential modifications to those projects, in addition to other TRRP issues affecting the Trinity River. To View The Complete Agenda: Visit www.trrp.net or call (530) 623 - 1800 for more information -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TMC 01.04 Flyer 1.2-1.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 125568 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Thu Dec 29 16:31:54 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 16:31:54 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Trinity Management Council public meeting January 4 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. in TPUD conference room, Weaverville In-Reply-To: <4EFD0534.9000504@tcrcd.net> References: <4EFD0534.9000504@tcrcd.net> Message-ID: <4EFD067A.3040004@tcrcd.net> Please see attachment for details. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TMC 01.04 Flyer 1.2-1.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 125568 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 29 16:52:04 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 16:52:04 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal article and opinions Message-ID: <1B0807DF-B00D-48E7-B829-ABB787EC273E@att.net> River council meets Wednesday on 2012 projects http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-12-28/Front_Page/River_council_meets_Wednesday_on_2012_projects.html The Trinity Management Council, which governs the work of the Trinity River Restoration Program, will hold a special meeting on Wednesday, Jan. 4, to make decisions pertinent to modifications to the 2012 program of work for the Trinity River. "We are working very hard to integrate community concerns about changes in fish habitat in the river into the technical planning process," said restoration program Executive Director Robin Schrock, "specifically those of river guides, who are some of the best eyes we have out there on the water." Restoration program technical experts met with interested stakeholders, including river guides, on Dec. 19 to determine what restoration project design features could be modified and still reach habitat restoration goals. As a result of these discussions and other analysis, some of the modifications technical teams are recommending include reduction in the size and scope of proposed project features, including side channels, and large gravel and wood geomorphic structures. "These recommendations are being made in response to input received over the last few months," Schrock said. "We are working very hard to listen to our community partners to be sure that our efforts are aligned." The Trinity Management Council meeting will be held at the Trinity Public Utilities District conference room in Weaverville from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., with the discussion surrounding the 2012 project modifications scheduled for the morning session. For more information contact the Trinity River Restoration Program at 623-1800, or visit www.trrp.net. Not fooled by TRRP?s PR push http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-12-28/Opinion/Not_fooled_by_TRRPs_PR_push.html FROM LIZ MUIR DOUGLAS CITY The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) pays the Resource Conservation District to create an illusion. The federal government?s river restoration staff treats poorly our private landowners and businesses so it hires people to improve its public relations. No one is fooled. Rather than buying a buffer for its engineers, TRRP and Bureau of Reclamation need to respect the river and its people. The best public relation TRRP can buy is to pay landowners and businesses for river changes up front, rather than forcing tort claims. Another feel good move would be to pay all who have to come to public meetings, not just the government employees and their contractors. These would be respectful actions that benefit all. Trinity River status about as natural as it?s going to get http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-12-28/Opinion/Trinity_River_status_about_as_natural_as_its_going.html FROM BRUCE HEFFINGTON WEAVERVILLE I am enclosing a picture of a large catch of fish and a group of people claiming to be fishermen. Don?t worry, all the people in the October 1948 picture are dead but me. I am that young kid with the fishing pole. The point of this letter is in answer to Trinity River Restoration Program Executive Director Robin Schrock?s statement that it is to return natural river processes to the Trinity River. I wonder if after looking at Gene Goodyear and crew?s property that washing out the existing bridges wouldn?t be called natural, too. You don?t know how close they came. And yes, I was there when they turned out all that water. This brings me to the picture. The man sitting is Royal Trimble, an avid fly fisherman. California Highway Patrolman Walt Loomis, chief over the Wintus, Lloyd Smith and son (Smith Lumber), Armon Heffington and son Bruce and unknown person. At daylight Royal Trimble, Walt Loomis and myself threw our first hook in the water. Mine was an airplane spinner with a fly tied two feet above the spinner. We hit the best known riffle on the river at that time. The first cast I hooked a fish, he stood on his tail and threw the hook back at me. That was the last fish we saw until we arrived in Hoopa in an opentopped Jeep. We bought the fish from the Indians. These fish in the picture are the fish. Well, you aren?t supposed to buy the fish anymore but the Indians in Hoopa want you to pay for fishing rights. Now what could be more natural than that for the Trinity River? I?d say, go home Trinity River Restoration, you done a good job. Everything on the Trinity is natural now. And yes that trip was darn cold from Weaverville to Hoopa and back in an open-top Jeep, but we were fishing, and look at how many fish we brought home! Stokely's note: You can read a lot about Armon Heffington's role as an agent for Westlands Water District and Congressman Clair Engle in getting the Trinity River Division approved by Trinity County in the e-book "How the Trinity Lost its Water" by Dane Durham, located at: http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/175 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 15p1.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10564 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 29 17:56:31 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:56:31 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] TMC agenda for January 4 and TRRP calendar for January 2012 Message-ID: Thanks to the TRRP staff for getting this agenda on the website and sending it to me as well as the monthly TRRP calendar. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Draft Agenda TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL Weaverville Library, 211 Main Street Weaverville CA 96093 Wednesday, January 4, 2012 Wednesday, January 4, 2012 Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader Regular Business: 9:30 1. Introductions: Brian Person, Chair - Approval of Agenda - Introductions - Approval of September 2011 Minutes 10:00 2. Open Forum: Comments on the agenda Brian Person 10:30 3. Report from TAMWG Chair Arnold Whitridge 11:00 4. Report from TMC Chair Brian Person 11:30 5. 2012 Projects DJ Bandrowski 12:30 LUNCH Information / Decision Items: 1:30 6. Report from Executive Director Robin Schrock Watershed Assessment - scope and budget 2:00 7. Wood - debris/hazards DJ Bandrowski Solicitors white paper on hazards Facilitated approach for public safety/hazard response 2:30 8. EPIC letter Brian Person 3:00 9. TMC bylaw draft re: monthly teleconferences Robin Schrock 3:30 10. Open Forum: Comments from the public 4:00 11. Calendar Brian Person 4:30 Adjourn TRRP Activity Announcements Please send contributions for next month?s announcement by January 27th to Deanna Jackson: dljackson at usbr.gov; 530-623-1800. Calendar ? MEETINGS IN JANUARY: o January 2 ? HOLIDAY ? Happy New Year! o January 4 ? Special Trinity Management Council Meeting, Weaverville (Contact Robin Schrock, rschrock at usbr.gov) o January 10 ? Visit of Giyoung Ock, Postdoctoral Researcher at UC Berkeley Institute of Urban and Regional Development. Advisor Dr. Matthew Kondolf (Contact Ernie Clarke, ernest_clarke at fws.gov) o January 16 ? HOLIDAY o January 17 ? Wildlife/Riparian Work Group Meeting, Weaverville, 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Contact Andrew Jensen, ajensen at dfg.ca.gov) o January 19 ? TMC Conference Call, 10:00 a.m. ? 12:00 p.m. (Contact Robin Schrock, rschrock at usbr.gov) o January 23-27 ? Scientific Advisory Board ? TRRP Work Group Consultations, Weaverville (Contact Ernie Clarke, ernest_clarke at fws.gov or Robin Schrock, rschrock at usbr.gov) o January 30 ? TRRP Riparian Ecologist Interviews (Contact George Kautsky, hupafish at hoopa-nsn.gov) ? UPCOMING MEETINGS (Subject to Change): o February 8 ? Fish Work Group Meeting ? Location to be determined o February 15 ? Physical Work Group Meeting ? Arcata o February 16 ? TMC Conference Call (Contact Robin Schrock, rschrock at usbr.gov) o February 17 ? Adult Review Presentation o February 20 ? HOLIDAY o February 21 ? Flow Work Group Meeting ? Construction: o Revegetation work at Wheel Gulch is scheduled for January 2?6, 2012. o Revegetation work at Reading Creek is scheduled to start on January 9, 2012 and complete on January 20, 2012. Publications ? TRRP (2011) TRRP Adult Salmonid Monitoring Review Work shop presentations - October 2011. ? PWA (2011) Indian Creek Restoration Concepts. Report to the Trinity County Resource Conservation District. ? Department of Water Resources (1985) Negative Declaration and Initial Study: Trinity River Pool and Riffle Construction for Fishery Restoration. Revision of March 1984 Negative Declaration. [Hamilton Ponds and several mainstem pools] ? Pelzman, R.J. (1973) Causes and Possible Prevention of Riparian Plant Encroachment on Anadromous Fish Habitat. California Department of Fish and Game. Environmental Services Branch Adminstrative Report No. 73-1. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Thu Dec 29 18:22:18 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 18:22:18 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Need to protect northern California groundwater from SoCal interests Message-ID: <4EFD205A.9070303@tcrcd.net> Chico News and Review opinion article: http://www.newsreview.com/chico/protect-our-groundwater-now/content?oid=4717625 Protect our groundwater now Powerful Southern California interests want to make use of it By Nora Todenhagen This article was published on 12.29.11 . The author is a retired Chico State lecturer who serves on the board of directors of AquAlliance. She lives in Chico. *It rained last year; it may rain this year, but the* health of the Tuscan and other Northern California aquifers depends not only on rain, but also on the actions of the state and federal governments driven by powerful corporate farmers and developers to the south. The federal government and a water authority south of the Delta are preparing an environmental review to transfer up to 600,000 acre-feet of groundwater /each year/ over 10 years to the western San Joaquin Valley. That's more groundwater than Chico would use in 200 years. There is also a bill in the House of Representatives that would guarantee industrial farms in desert lands water /no matter how dry the year/. The state government is just as dangerous. Two proposals, the Delta Stewardship Council's Plan and the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan, seek to do the impossible: protect the Delta and export massive amounts of water to Southern California. They've promised more water than there is. Here is how a staff geologist of the state Department of Water Resources, Carl Hauge, wants to solve the problem. In September of this year at the state Water Commission he made these points on a slide: Under the heading "Full Aquifers in Sacramento Valley," he listed five steps in the process of making use of our groundwater: one, "export surface water"; two, "irrigate local land with groundwater---called groundwater substitution"; three, "aquifers are emptied"; four, "recharge with future surface water"; five, "may affect existing surface water rights." Taken together, these government programs represent a massive transfer of wealth from the family farms of Northern California to the corporate interests to the south. Emptying the aquifers would kill the oaks and dry the creeks with all their fish and wildlife. Think of Bidwell Park looking like the Owens Valley with a trickle of water in the creek, no fish, and the land without vegetation. Years of litigation there have failed to put that water back. Like the Owens Valley, our region could suffer economic depression and environmental blight. What should you do? Get and keep informed. The AquAlliance website at www.aqualliance.net has information on and links to these government proposals. Make sure your representatives---city, county, state and federal---are protecting your groundwater. Consider joining AquAlliance, the only organization dedicated to the groundwater of the Sacramento Hydrologic Region. We can work together by using our voices and using the law to demand that our interests be protected. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Dec 30 08:59:16 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 08:59:16 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] please note TMC meeting has meeting is now being held at TPUD References: Message-ID: <05AF893C-B81A-4577-818B-289092E021D7@att.net> From: "Schrock, Robin M" Date: December 30, 2011 8:01:38 AM PST To: "tstokely at att.net" Subject: please note TMC meeting has meeting is now being held at TPUD Robin M. Schrock Executive Director Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 TEL: (530) 623-1800 FAX: (530) 623-5944 CELL: (530) 945-7489 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TMC 01.04 Flyer 1.2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 122188 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Fri Dec 30 17:26:07 2011 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 17:26:07 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] HCN article: Tribes Could Turn the Tables on Water Control Message-ID: <4EFE64AF.2060902@tcrcd.net> http://www.hcn.org/hcn/blogs/range/tribes-could-turn-the-tables-on-water-control From tstokely at att.net Sat Dec 31 16:47:05 2011 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 16:47:05 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- River Access on Reservation Denied Message-ID: <63E1386A-4A9B-4E85-9153-5B47C0EE42EB@att.net> River Access on Reservation Denied http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/12/river-access-on-reservation-denied/ The Trinity River, world famous for Steelhead fishing, flows through the Hoopa Valley. The Hoopa Valley Tribe recently blocked river access on the reservation to non-tribal members in an effort to curb a vandalism, littering, and squatting problem. Fishermen hope to meet with the tribe soon to discuss a solution. / Photo by Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune. Fishing Guides at Attention By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune A misunderstanding about river access on the Hoopa Reservation has a handful of fishing guides reeling with questions. At first glance, a few fishermen interpreted a sign posted at Tish Tang Campground to mean that the Hoopa Tribe placed a prohibition on non-Tribal member fishing on the reservation. A flurry of phone calls from concerned fishermen began to flood Willow Creek-based river guide and Chamber of Commerce board member, Ed Duggan. ?The reservation has always been open access for fishing as far back as I can remember,? Duggan said. ?There?s people who have been fishing down there since the ?40s. We?ve got people that come from all over the state and some from out of state to fish for steelhead.? The signs actually say No Trespass. According to Hoopa Tribal Chairman, Leonard Masten Jr., the tribe never intended to prohibit recreational fishing by non-tribal members. They intended to block river access on their private property in an effort to decrease the amount of vandalism, littering, and squatting that occurs on tribal property. The tribe also complains about recreational fishermen being disrespectful and refusing to comply with the Hoopa Tribe?s fisheries department surveys, such as creel census, one of the many forms of fish counting used to measure harvest and predict future run sizes. Masten asked why the tribe should allow fishermen to access the river using tribal property when some fishermen lack respect for the tribe? Duggan said the guides are not the problem explaining that a litany of similar problems occur on U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management lands?lands fishing guides are accustomed to paying fees to access. Duggan hopes a group of fishing guides and others who regularly use river access points on the reservation can have a sit down meeting with the chairman and tribal council to resolve the issue. He said, ?Why point fingers at each other when one or two stupid people make a mistake?? Another well-known fishing guide who fishes the Trinity during October, John Klar said, ?If you have one bad kid, you don?t clear the classroom.? The signs are posted at several locations on the reservation including two of the more popular river access roads, Tish Tang Campground and Red Rock. At Tish Tang the sign is posted on a tree next to a locked gate. The sign reads, ?No Trespass, No River Access, Private Property, closed to all non-Hoopa Tribal Members, Notice. It also goes on to cite excerpts from the Tribe?s Title 15?Trespassing Ordinance. The tribe?s law clearly states that tribal lands within the boundaries of the reservation are to be managed by the tribe for the benefit of its members. Masten said that others who wish to use the lands for various purposes are welcomed to do so after obtaining a permit from the tribe. Details about how to obtain a permit specific to river access were not available at press time. Owner of Bigfoot Rafting Company, Marc Rowley, uses the Tish Tang access road daily during the peak of rafting season. He?s in favor of paying a fee to access the river on the reservation. ?It?s just part of doing business. It?s nothing unusual to me. I?ve always been a champion of getting everything in order and keeping an eye on it,? he said. ?Having people patrolling and keeping a lid on everything is a good thing.? Rowley brought the subject to the Willow Creek Community Services District meeting last week. He posed a question to the WCCSD about whether or not an agreement existed between the USFS, WCCSD, and the Hoopa Tribe to provide river access at the Tish Tang Campground following a land transfer between the USFS and the Hoopa Tribe that occurred in 1997. The TRT did not find a written agreement but has cited the congressional act that transferred the land in a sidebar to this article. Rowley said that if the closure is permanent it could have ?huge financial implications for Willow Creek, devastatingly huge.? He hopes that the Hoopa Tribe will consider developing a management plan along the river. ?I understand their frustrations. They?re absolutely warranted?I?m hoping we can work with them and they can develop a format to better control this genuine and real problem. I?d like to see a higher level of local organized government involvement.? Klar, whose most popular guide trip is on the Trinity River, is of similar sentiment. He believes a fee structure or permitting process is a fitting solution to the problem. ?There was some disrespect and there was a response. It boils down to a lack of respect from some specific individuals that ruined it for the rest of us,? he said. ?I?m in favor of a permitting process facilitated by the tribe. At least then you?ll have some sort of recourse.? When it comes to tourism in the Klamath Trinity Valley, fishing tops the list of reasons travelers visit the area, bringing with them dollars vital to the struggling economy. Duggan fears the economic repercussions of the tribe?s decision to block river access could be devastating to Hoopa?s economy. ?When people ask me where they can get a bite to eat in Hoopa, I tell them Joe?s Deli makes a good deli sandwich, the Burger Barn makes a great hamburger, or you can go to Laura?s Kitchen and get a hell-of-a good breakfast,? he said. ?What happens when that?s gone?? Ed ?The Orange Man? Baker has traveled to Hoopa for 37 years faithfully to fish the Trinity for Steelhead. He can usually be found in downtown Hoopa selling fresh oranges. He uses the money from orange sales to pay for his fishing trips. He brings an R.V. but has also stayed at the Tsewenaldin Inn at times. And before the Tsewenaldin Inn he recalls renting rooms for two weeks at a time at the old Deep Sleep Motel and having an occasional beer at the Hupa Club. ?This is a shock to me [the access closure],? he said. ?I guess I feel kind of like a home boy since I?ve been coming here for so long. It?s absolutely been a great experience coming here.? Although tourism provides a seasonal economic boost for the Willow Creek community, that?s arguably not the case in Hoopa. Mike Mularky, the manager of the Hoopa Mini Mart said he rarely, if ever, sees fishing guides at the service station. ?You?d think since gas is cheaper here than anywhere else in Humboldt County that we?d see more of the fisherman traffic, but we really don?t,? he said. Nonetheless, Duggan believes every dollar spent in the area is critical. ?This hurts my business because I can?t take my customers down there,? he said. ?But it doesn?t kill me, because I have other places we can fish.? Guided fishing trips on the Trinity River cost about $350 to $400 per day according to Duggan. About $50 of that is spent on shuttling and a smaller fraction is spent on river access elsewhere. Perhaps in the future another portion will be paid to the Hoopa Tribe for access permits. Guides are hopeful for a meeting with Hoopa Tribal representatives early in 2012. ### SIDEBAR Hoopa Valley Reservation South Boundary Adjustment Act Passed in November, 1997 by the 105th Congress Section 2 Transfer of Lands Within Six Rivers National Forest for Hoopa Valley Tribe All right, title and interest in and to the lands described in subsection (b) shall hereafter be administered by the Secretary of the Interior and be held in trust by the United States for the Hoopa Valley Tribe. The lands are hereby declared part of the Hoopa Valley Reservation. Upoin the inclusion of such lands in the Hoopa Valley Reservation, Forest Service system roads numbered 8No3 and 7N51 and the Trinity River access road which is a spur off road numbered 7N51, shall be Indian reservation roads, as defined in section 101(a) of title 23 of the United States Code? [Source: PL 105-79] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1752river.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 79909 bytes Desc: not available URL: